You're viewing a single thread.
With electoral reform, we could have more then two artificially limited options. We could have competition in our elections. We could be free...
But currently you aren't and the options are damage control or burning the house down...
- A French person that was in a similar position a few monthes ago.
Great point. If Americans don't like their options, they should spare a thought for French progressives holding their nose and voting for Macron, over and over and over.
Eeeeeeh I'm not going to compare Macron and Harris. She's not been a stepping stool for the R again and again and again.
I was referring to our last legislative election (think Congress if you need an American point of reference). It happened last summer and Left wing voters had to make a coalition up to the socialist party and the greens which are our centrist parties.
She’s not been a stepping stool for the R again and again and again.
She's campaigning with Mike Bloomberg, Jeff Flake, and Liz Cheney. I've seen nothing to suggest she's learned from Clinton or Obama in this regard.
French progressives
voting for Macron
Uh... LFI had wide popular support to the point of being the most voted, what on Earth are you talking about?
Well, how well did the damage control strategy go lmao
The strategy went well as in the NFP (leftwing coalition) got a plurality of the votes.
The issue is that the ruling party (En Marche) said fuck it and allied with the fascists.
I meant in the US, sorry
Well not good either ^^`
This trend of backsliding democracies truly is terrifying.
We will never have election reform that represents the will of the people, because the capitalist class, which has run this country since its inception through bourgeois revolution, will never allow “tyranny of the majority” reforms. They would sooner unleash fascism upon us than allow real democracy.
I think the first, most realistic progress we can make is to get a few more states to sign the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. It's a agreement between state legislature to assign their electors based on the national popular vote, and it automatically goes into effect once enough states have signed on to guarantee 270 electoral votes.
It bypasses the need to pass a constitutional ammendment that is functionally impossible to get through.
And it's within grasp. Enough states have already signed on for 209 of the 270 threshold (Maine just signed it into law in April), with several states pending for another 50 (e.g. Nevada is waiting on governor'ssignature).
We're shockingly close to killing the electoral college, and nobody seems to know about it.
Trump looks poised to win the popular vote as well. The system doesn't help but the problem is ultimately us, not the system. We have failed culturally, socially, spiritually, emotionally, however else you want to describe it. Look the failure in the face and prepare yourself to deal with it for the rest of your life.
Don't romanticise it. You'll still have a small number of options in total, and you'll be unlikely to shake the dominance of the 2 major parties. You'll still worry about "wasting" your vote on a party who will get low representation. You'll still be disappointed when the centre left don't do anything meaningful. You'll still be powerless when the right hold government. You'll still have trouble finding someone you want to vote for.
Yes it's better, but it's not Paradise.
Source: Lived in New Zealand under MMP for five electoral cycles.
As a NZr, I agree. But it does make smaller third parties viable. In NZ, Greens, ACT and NZ First are all third parties where a vote is not wasted if their block wins
one can dream