Zone1 Duopoly: An American Problem

[Unkotare]

You already said that. It wasn’t original or clever the first time either.

Also, I like it here. Pointing out things that I perceive as flaws doesn’t mean I want to start somewhere else completely fresh.

Grow up. I can be critical without needing to leave.

You clearly lack the courage of your so-called convictions.

 

[XponentialChaos]

It seems to me that we've abandoned leadership and consensus as political goals. There's no sense that we're one nation. Fear-mongering partisans have demonized their opponents so successfully that each side is consumed with fear and paranoia. In that state of mind, people will believe anything, do anything, to "fight" the other side.

Our elections are no longer about electing a leader. They've become proxy civil wars, between the Democrats and Republican, a power struggle over government that has become too powerful.

I don't see it changing until we change the voting system to strip the partisans of the key source of their power - the lesser of two evils con game. Ranked choice voting does that, and I think it would, in time, un-divide us. But it may be too late.

I tried the ranked choice voting angle. I was naive, but I thought it would actually reach some kind of common ground with people since it’s not a partisan idea. Unfortunately, that wasn’t the case.

I’m starting to get the impression that people like what we have. Maybe they’re dependent on it and don’t want to be unplugged.

 

[XponentialChaos]

You clearly lack the courage of your so-called convictions.

You’ve already been exposed as a liar, might as well keep going with it, right?

As I’ve already explained, I have no convictions to leave the country. You’re just being defensive because I said something critical. When facts offend you, it’s clearly you with the problem, not me.

 

[theHawk]

And Mac nails it again.

I see you can’t answer my question.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

What do you mean?

Are you saying that we have viable 3rd parties? Because it’s pretty clear that we don’t.

People are free to vote for any of them. But I guess you need a few more

 

[XponentialChaos]

People are free to vote for any of them. But I guess you need a few more

We have plenty of 3rd parties. Of course people are free to vote for them.

They just don’t. Because of the duopoly. Hence the entire point of the thread.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

We have plenty of 3rd parties. Of course people are free to vote for them.

They just don’t. Because of the duopoly. Hence the entire point of the thread.

They CAN, but they don't

I follow the Buckley rule.: Vote for the best candidate who has a snowballs chance in hell of winning

 

[DudleySmith]

America is in a fight between Globalists and Nationalists. Globalists back the Democrats and Nationalists back the GOP. The last viable third Party option died with H. Ross Perot the big money will never back a third party candidate again. It's all about money and power and a fight for what America is supposed to become. Choose your team.

Sadly this is the current situation, and neither 'team' is going to save the country.


In other news, the Party that won the last election in any state gets to control the voting and ballot counts. We would need to contract out our elections to somebody like Finland or Sweden if we were serious about change, as well as preventing parties wit deep pockets from harassing smaller parties via the courts and denying them space on the ballots. 'Winner Take All' also needs to be abolished, and parliamentary rules also modified.

 

[dblack]

I tried the ranked choice voting angle. I was naive, but I thought it would actually reach some kind of common ground with people since it’s not a partisan idea. Unfortunately, that wasn’t the case.

No, current partisans will never see any appeal in RCV. It, quite deliberately, pulls the rug out from under their fear-mongering game. That's why it's being accomplished from the ground up. The screeching partisan nonsense isn't as popular at the local level, where you might live next door to the people you're demonizing, so there's not as much opposition. That's where we're making quite a bit of progress with RCV. Once people are comfortable with it, and understand it, at the local level, adopting it nationally will be much easier.

I’m starting to get the impression that people like what we have. Maybe they’re dependent on it and don’t want to be unplugged.

Despite what the media tells us daily, I'm convinced the jackasses are a minority, and people are tired of giving them center stage. Not here, of course. But in the real world.

 

[Unkotare]

You’ve already been exposed as a liar, ...

How so?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If we implemented this change in America, would it break up the duopoly in America? Impossible to know for sure, but personally, I don’t think it would.

The duopoly derives its power from the guarantee of being reelected thus they do not need to worry about fulfilling promises or doing what is best for the country

Add in more than 2 parties and you remove that guarantee

 

[XponentialChaos]

They CAN, but they don't

I follow the Buckley rule.: Vote for the best candidate who has a snowballs chance in hell of winning

I agree with that rule.

The problem is that the only people who have a snowballs chance in hell of winning are in exactly two parties. The duopoly.

Other countries don’t have this same problem.

 

[Pellinore]

In my opinion, many of the issues in American politics are rooted in the duopoly. We have a tribal mentality of us vs them and it puts us at odds with each other constantly. We hate each other. We would rather vote for someone we don't like than to let the other party take over. It's a race to the bottom and we're all determined to win.

I know we have some 3rd party voters here who adamantly refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils. While I understand your values, I just don't see a 3rd party becoming a realistic option with the current system that we have in place. In my opinion, there needs to be a change to the system in order to break up the duopoly. I've spoken greatly about ranked-choice voting and why I think it's so beneficial here: CDZ - Ranked Voting

But I've gone through that already. Let's just look around the world and examine what other countries are doing. Many countries have branches of government similar to us but don't deal with the same bipartisan crap that we do. The more I look at this, the more it looks like an American problem.

Switzerland. Switzerland is a republic. Their legislative branch consists of two houses. Those houses look like this. The different colors represent different political parties.

View attachment 709462

Mexico. Mexico is a presidential republic. Here is what the houses in their legislature look like.

View attachment 709463

Brazil. Brazil is another presidential republic. Here is what the houses in their legislature look like.

View attachment 709464
Japan. Japan is a constitutional monarchy. The emperor has a limited ceremonial role. The legislative branch looks like this.

View attachment 709465

Germany. Germany is a representative democratic republic. Their legislative branch looks like this.

View attachment 709468

I could go on and on, but I think you get the idea. Now look at the United States of America.

View attachment 709470

List of countries by system of government - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Why? Why is the duopoly so prevalent in our politics but not in other countries? What are they doing differently? Why can't we learn from them?

It's simple; it is built in to the government.

The first-past-the-post Electoral College system encourages factions to coalesce into two parties, because the winner is the first to cross halfway.

In Congress specifically, the same is true of the Speaker and Senate Majority Leader positions. Whoever has more than 50% gets the keys to the kingdom, thus parties will combine to get more than 50%.

As long as those are in place, third parties will be spoilers at best.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I follow the Buckley rule.: Vote for the best candidate who has a snowballs chance in hell of winning

Anyone enough people vote for has a chance of winning.

The problem with your view is it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy....nobody will vote for a 3rd party candidate because they cannot win, they cannot win because nobody will vote for them.

 

[XponentialChaos]

How so?

You claimed that I made an ignorant declaration. I asked you what ignorant declaration I made. You made up some nonsense that I never said.

Therefore, you lied.

 

[Unkotare]

.....

As I’ve already explained, I have no convictions to leave the country. .....

You have indicated that you think other countries are superior, so you would be foolish not to leave here and go live in one of them. Of course in a few years you would start to see the flaws in those countries as well.

 

[Unkotare]

You claimed that I made an ignorant declaration. ....

You did.

 

[XponentialChaos]

You have indicated that you think other countries are superior,..

At some things, yes. We're not the best at everything.

That doesn't indicate that I want to leave the country, leave my friends and family behind, and start a new life over in a brand new place.

Do you understand that now? Of course you don't. In your narrow-minded worldview, any time anyone says something critical, it means that they are looking to find a way out. Someone like you couldn't possibly fathom that there might be many, many other factors to consider.

 

[XponentialChaos]

You did.

So post it, liar.

Last time I asked you to back up your claim, you made up some baseless bullshit. Go ahead and quote me this time.

 

[Unkotare]

.... leave the country, leave my friends and family behind, and start a new life over in a brand new place.

....

Because you lack the courage to do such a thing.