|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
Yeah, between FPTP and ballot access, it isn't a mystery why third parties are so minor in the US (the US isn't much of a functioning representative democracy if that was unclear). (Also that doesn't even include voter suppression, the laughable amount of money in our politics and poo poo like the electoral college etc etc etc.) Ardennes fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Jun 23, 2017 |
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:04 |
|
|
MrFlibble posted:I thought Vermin Supreme was more like the UKs monster raving looney party - I remember him pledging free ponies for all so they could turn pony poo poo into methane gas. Is he libertarian? Cos thats way less fun. He's running a grift on the libertarians right now. If you actually look at his views he's closest to a left anarchist/crust punk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
Unbelievably Fat Man posted:He's running a grift on the libertarians right now. If you actually look at his views he's closest to a left anarchist/crust punk. Thats good - If Vermin Supreme was a genuine nutjob like rand paul I would have been sad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Nah, PSL aren't that unknown. They got *coughs embarrassedly* 70,000 votes in November! How much did the Socialist Party get in comparison? I bet that they get more votes simply by virtue of being thinking "hmm I consider myself a socialist and this is called the Socialist Party!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:How much did the Socialist Party get in comparison? I bet that they get more votes simply by virtue of being thinking "hmm I consider myself a socialist and this is called the Socialist Party!" Slightly over 65 million, seeing as they endorsed Hillary Clinton for president.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
There's an argument to be made that we have six major parties, with two and four of them respectively sharing a ballot line
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Crossposting this since ossoffchat has spilled every which way and it might be relevant for someone:quote:Personally, the issue with Ossoff's results isn't that he did well (he did), but rather that with millions of dollars of support he managed to turn in less impressive results than three candidates given no money and running on leftism and community roots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Crossposting this since ossoffchat has spilled every which way and it might be relevant for someone: Yea, don't bother trying to argue in the Trump thread, apparently it's actually the Centrist thread and they just want to be outraged at Trump tweets instead of discussing the future and possible solutions. The lying about the UK election is the most  thing to me, it's so blatantly a lie. Heaven forbid they admit leftism actually was popular.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:There's an argument to be made that we have six major parties, with two and four of them respectively sharing a ballot line it's two bad we've got 2 bad parties in the dems, even if one of them is dying cause they stab everyone in the back constantly. hopefully the third wayers die off too cause they're worthless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Crossposting this since ossoffchat has spilled every which way and it might be relevant for someone:
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
waffle posted:I definitely agree about Ossoff's unimpressive results probably being due to his lack of standing for anything. Were the other 3 democrats in the other special elections leftists though? (I assume that's who you're talking about?) I thought they were mostly pretty milquetoast Democrats too. Quist was pretty drat leftist, particularly for someone running in Montana. I wonder how he could have done with $5 million instead of nothing. Hell, even $1 million.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
waffle posted:I definitely agree about Ossoff's unimpressive results probably being due to his lack of standing for anything. Were the other 3 democrats in the other special elections leftists though? (I assume that's who you're talking about?) I thought they were mostly pretty milquetoast Democrats too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
waffle posted:I definitely agree about Ossoff's unimpressive results probably being due to his lack of standing for anything. Were the other 3 democrats in the other special elections leftists though? (I assume that's who you're talking about?) I thought they were mostly pretty milquetoast Democrats too. I can't speak for all of them, but from what I recall Quist was leftist enough to push what Sanders & ground level activists want, and I recall the other two being able to say the same. Ultimately that's all that's really needed to pass the "purity test" of leftists; push for progress that the party's voters are demanding, energize the district with real person issues instead of "cut wasteful spending" and "create new connections between tech colleges and tech companies". I'm pretty excited for Iron Stache. He's running pretty hard on "healthcare as it stands is unacceptable and we need better" and he has a real personality to him, which is something that Ossoff could never say.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:all of them proposed leftist policies (granted everyone but quist beating around the bush), ossoff actively avoided them
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I'm pretty excited for Iron Stache. He's running pretty hard on "healthcare as it stands is unacceptable and we need better" and he has a real personality to him, which is something that Ossoff could never say. Same here. His ad is extremely effective, and is the kind of "rural leftism" we need to push in red districts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6zAyPRbels Something as simple as "I love my mom, my mom has health problems, we look out for each other" is such a powerful message that resonates so well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
There are Democrat cosponsors on Trump's ATC privatization bill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Then why do third parties struggle so with gaining acceptance and support? Voting systems in USA suck rear end. Strategic voting is the optimal approach for voters. Can't vote for a better option than the big two, for fear of the worse of the big two winning => other parties don't get votes => the big two remain the big two => cycle repeats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Iron stache is already a bought and paid for centrist fraud. smh here's hoping a workplace accident takes care of him soon enough. Link?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
I believe he's referring to David Brock supporting Iron Stache. I have a more optimistic look of things; Brock is attempting to remain relevant after Hillary's name has become toxic, in a "capitalists will sell you the noose you use to hang them" way. I'l eat my words if it does turn out Stache has some unfortunate opinions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Yea, don't bother trying to argue in the Trump thread, apparently it's actually the Centrist thread and they just want to be outraged at Trump tweets instead of discussing the future and possible solutions. No, we're specifically sick of your and Cereberal Bore's posting, and you're cherrypicking the dumb responses to serve as a strawman. Stop staging thread invasions, and feel free to report anyone who does the same to this thread. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
A lovely Reporter posted:No, we're specifically sick of your and Cereberal Bore's posting, and you're cherrypicking the dumb responses to serve as a strawman. Stop staging thread invasions, and feel free to report anyone who does the same to this thread. I'll stop going in there, it's just sad to see so many people acting like ostriches with the head in the sand. I hope they have fun when the "do nothing different" strategy fails in 2018.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I'll stop going in there, it's just sad to see so many people acting like ostriches with the head in the sand. Thanks, I genuinely appreciate it. And yeah, a lot of posting in the thread is people wanting to keep hope even when it seems unreasonable. For the record, I'm disappointed with the Hillary campaign and Barack Obama's presidency, and wish someone like Corbyn was president. Edit: Was editing in that second line really necessary? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Then why do third parties struggle so with gaining acceptance and support? The warping influence of unchecked money, lack of coverage and exposure due to a media thoroughly dominated by the interests of the rich, and artificial legal barriers for ballot access. Here's a good article with some of the hoops you have to jump through as a non democrat/republican: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/11/bernie-sanders-democratic-labor-party-ackerman/
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
A bit of bad news about the 'stache. https://twitter.com/IronStache/status/840242514942672896 This is not a dealbreaker for me. It shows that we have work to do on Randy. Bernie had to come around to BLM and get educated by his electorate, this is nothing new. I mean, it takes work to know that David Frum/Mensch/the rest of these people are actual scum. They get treated with respect by institutions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
A lovely Reporter posted:Thanks, I genuinely appreciate it. And yeah, a lot of posting in the thread is people wanting to keep hope even when it seems unreasonable. For the record, I'm disappointed with the Hillary campaign and Barack Obama's presidency, and wish someone like Corbyn was president. Sorry, I'm a little mean today. I agree with your views and honestly I'm not even a loving leftist, not really. But the 2016 election was a hell of a wakeup call and the fact that the Dems didn't appear to get that call is loving killing me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Hell,  . No hard feelings.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
A lovely Reporter posted:No, we're specifically sick of your and Cereberal Bore's posting, and you're cherrypicking the dumb responses to serve as a strawman. Stop staging thread invasions, and feel free to report anyone who does the same to this thread. You mean that you flip the gently caress out the moment somebody disagrees with the thread consensus and start some circlejerk about how all leftists are dumb and bad because they don't think that everything is peachy keen? EDIT: And for the record I'm only bringing this up beause it's real typical bad dem behaviour. Cerebral Bore fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Jun 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Got a quick question for everyone, but how did the "Third way" come to dominate after Reagen? I don't mean in a political "across all parties" kind of way, but what allowed them to gain such control over the democratic party and its apparatus?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Got a quick question for everyone, but how did the "Third way" come to dominate after Reagen? I don't mean in a political "across all parties" kind of way, but what allowed them to gain such control over the democratic party and its apparatus? Bill Clinton won.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Got a quick question for everyone, but how did the "Third way" come to dominate after Reagen? I don't mean in a political "across all parties" kind of way, but what allowed them to gain such control over the democratic party and its apparatus? Bill Clinton, THE Third Way Guy, won a close election where an independent Ross Perot helped gouge a chunk out of the GOP vote. The Clintons massively reward loyalty through their corporate ties so everyone jumped on the gravy train.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Got a quick question for everyone, but how did the "Third way" come to dominate after Reagen? I don't mean in a political "across all parties" kind of way, but what allowed them to gain such control over the democratic party and its apparatus? The Democratic Leadership Council - basically the heart of Third Way democrats - was made up of a bunch of up and comers in the party. Clinton, Gore, and Biden were all members, along with a bunch of influential strategists. When Clinton won he had a vast patronage network that basically took over most of the machinery of the Democratic Party. Really, the whole Third Way thing shows a shadowy cabal can easily seize control of a major political party from within, but you need a ton of loyal peons ready to move in as soon as you take the reigns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Got a quick question for everyone, but how did the "Third way" come to dominate after Reagen? I don't mean in a political "across all parties" kind of way, but what allowed them to gain such control over the democratic party and its apparatus? It actually started happening earlier than Clinton, or even Reagan. poo poo started going downhill when A, early Boomers, who hadn't been around for the Great Depression, grew up and started getting elected into office, and B, when Democratic leaders like Fred Dutton learned precisely the wrong lesson from the '68 and '72 elections. Here's a good piece on the change: quote:In 1974, young liberals did not perceive financial power as a threat, having grown up in a world where banks and big business were largely kept under control. It was the government—through Vietnam, Nixon, and executive power—that organized the political spectrum. By 1975, liberalism meant, as Carr put it, “where you were on issues like civil rights and the war in Vietnam.” With the exception of a few new members, like Miller and Waxman, suspicion of finance as a part of liberalism had vanished. It's a really good rundown of how the party evolved over the past several decades; I recommend everyone read it all the way through.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
I posted this in the Trump thread but it probably belongs here instead.Elotana posted:I think a lot of the neoliberal vs left stuff is overthinking, honestly. One of the consistent findings of political science is that voters are incredibly ignorant. Your dumbshit cousin who spams Trump memes is probably more well-informed than 90% of the populace because they're at least keeping up on current events through whatever chthonian prism they view the world. Trump barely had policies during the campaign and for the most part he still doesn't, which is why our IR is a mess and domestically he's just gonna sign whatever Congress gives him. His preexisting celebrity and outsider status was enough for incoherent tribal yelling to break a firewall that had been previously impervious to all the Republican PAC money and focus-testing in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Elotana posted:I posted this in the Trump thread but it probably belongs here instead. I'm glad you crossposted, I wanted to say it was a good post.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:A bit of bad news about the 'stache. Given the close ties elected wingnuts have to Breitbart, Alex Jones, whackadoo megachurches, various post-Klan offshoots in the South, etc., I have no problem with mustache guy being a loony toon on the tweets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:Show me a current third party in the United States that isn't run by a literal crazy person. Yes, but what makes them so different from Dems and Reps exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:The lying about the UK election is the most 
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Yeah but Corbyn didn't win so they should put him under the guillotine and get some new fresh blood I mean, when someone can say "these fire victims need to be given houses within their district, specifically these ones rich people aren't using" and then have a government that would normally be vehemently opposed to the suggestion execute it in the same week, they've essentially become Prime Minister.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Yeah but Corbyn didn't win so they should put him under the guillotine and get some new fresh blood If he goes on to preside over a decade-long losing streak, then yeah. So far he's winning big, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:04 |
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:There's an argument to be made that we have six major parties, with two and four of them respectively sharing a ballot line That was a good read and a good description of American politics. I think the thing that a lot of people don't get is that fundamentally the difference between our "two party" system and the multi-party coalition systems used by other democracies is that the coalitions are formed prior to the election. So Democrats build their coalition from a broad selection of "liberal" factions and the Republican's from the "conservative" factions. This is also why 3rd parties generally fail to make progress in the United States. Yes there are structural impediments however a lot of it is that they are trying to play a game while not understanding the rules. The CPC is the actual effective version of the green party. It came into existence because people finally stopped trying to do politics the wrong way. It was also helped a lot by technology that made it easier to coordinate , organize and finance. Unfortunately it lost a lot of steam after Obama's election and has yet to quite get back on it's feet. In my opinion if you really want to affect political change and shift the Democratic party to the left and thus affect real change you should focus your energy on expanding and growing that faction and the best way to do that is get active in local politics. Go to your local caucuses and become delegates find and support candidates who represent your views and goals and help them work to pull the party to the left. I think a lot of what went wrong after '08 was that it was such a slap in the face to achieve the level of victory that was gained only to be betrayed and dismissed by our purported allies who were more interested in reaching across the aisle to the Republicans in an effort to appear bipartisan than reach out to the progressives who provided most of the passion and energy that earned the victory. The problem is that the left really has only one card to play as long as the DLC and Blue dogs continue to shut them out and that's to deny them support. Oh and what is wrong with people with this whole "Replace Pelosi" nonsense. She's literally one of the founding members of the Progressive Caucus you nitwits so if you claim to be a leftist while calling for her to be replaced you are just doing the DLC and Blue dog's dirty work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 20:48
|
|
