politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
the dems seem as helpless to run this geriatric conservative as the gop are to prevent an actual fascist dictator wannabe from successfully running for office.
how can both these massive parties suck so fucking hard
Because voting in the primaries seems anathema to the young progressives who want to change.
I'm glad I'm a progressive that votes in the primary. I plan to vote in more progressives myself.
Thank you! Please keep doing it, and if possible, asking your friends to!
That's a comforting story but completely unsupported by reality. Look at the exit polls from whatever state you like. The under 30 crowd gets outvoted by 2-1, sometimes a 3-1 margin!
(This gets even more embarrassing when you realize that while the two groups are about the same size of the electorate, the elderly are less likely to vote Democratic, so as a share of potential Democratic voters the 65+ is beating the brakes off the under 30s.)
Also, young Democrats aren't uniformly progressive.
They voted in the early 2016 primaries too. And the same thing happened.
These are the same people telling us Demcoracy is on the line
And you are proposing what?
i dont... i kinda think were all fucked. the only action possible here is to just keep voting lesser evil.
i used to hope, but that runs out after the first few decades
They way to fix things is voting reform. But it can't be just any reform.
We have to ditch Ordinal voting systems. Every single one of them leads to some degree of two party dominance, with voters having to prioritize strategy over their own needs, because not doing so means they will be actively punished.
Cardinal systems are the only way to escape. Strategic voting becomes less necessary and less impactful.
My current favorite system is STAR. It takes all the great ideas of the best cardinal voting system (Score) and adds in an automatic runoff that greatly reduces the impact of clone candidate attacks.
the only voting system i endorse is consent-and-consensus
Do you mean something like Approval?
https://electowiki.org/wiki/Greatest_possible_consensus_winner
Approval would vastly improve things, but has some drawbacks. Score is like Approval, but a bit more so, and then STAR takes Score and adds to it again to be an even better system.
The systems above all break two party dominance, or rather they make it impossible to enforce two party dominance. Ordinal systems on the other hand, all fall victim to Arrow's theorem, and thus reinforce two-party dominance.
no, i mean total consensus.
So unanimous consensus? As in, something akin to expecting the tooth fairy to come wipe for you? There's no such system.
The closest thing is called Approval, and even with that system, there will be people who go away unhappy. Just far fewer of them than under any other voting system, and only if there are dozens or even hundreds of people running for office, and only then if the voters have perfect knowledge of every candidate.
lots of groups practice consensus.
Small groups. Not large nations.
That's the key difference. A tiny group of people can reach consensus, a large group literally cannot. Not when electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting.
>large nations.
>electing a representative, or even setting policy through direct voting.
i don't like those things.
Ah, a libertarian house cat.
That always ends.
baby, i'm an anarchist
The origins of the word libertarian were actually closest to being anarchist. But that shit doesn't work.
The whole, no government just neighbors who talk to each other sounds great on paper, but fails the second the community has more than about 150 people.
There's a reason why Amish and Mennonite communities formally split at 150 people. Because our brains cannot handle it.
A no holds barred Yu-Gi-Oh match. Winner becomes president, loser cleans the white house bathrooms for the next 4 years.
Will there be some kid competing while possessed by an ancient pharoah?
I believe you're under the mistaken impression that u/originalucifer is actually running one or both of these parties.
I never said this nor do I believe it. But engaging in doomscrolling and screaming into the void is not going to do much so I'm looking for ideas. Yes they are all way too old, there's no denying that. The question is: now what?
bOtH SIdeS
The Democrats are generally a fairly ineffective ally on good days. The Republicans are an effective enemy every day. It's not an equivocation to say those are both crappy options.
uhhh no.
"both sides" is pretending both suffer from the same issue... i have clearly not made that case
Because the electorate is doing little to nothing at the local scale to change voting methodology. Until that happens in a broad fashion, the two parties will continue to be a problem.
Edit: you can downvote all you want, it doesn't change reality.