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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
With the MAGA movement, you had massive capital backing the propaganda. And if im not mistaken, the OG Republicans didn't really fight against Trump.
With progressives within the Democrat party structure, you're fighting on multiple fronts -- against the party itself along with anyone interested in maintaining the status quo.
MAGA didn't go against the grain, they slid with the direction of the Overton window, albeit faster than what some were comfortable with. Going progressive is, well, the opposite of that.
And despite all of this, you somehow belief that starting a third party is a viable option?
take over them dems (long shot, been tried many many times) or start a new party. Lets try both. The republicans are a lost cause though, and we're clearly short on time.
Yes, there's a surprising amount of Rep voters who hates billionaires as much as the rest of us do, but Dems aren't truly working for the people either.
There's different ideologies among the parties, but both of them are anti peasants, pro elite.
Stuff like universal healthcare, free schools and proper psych wards are incredibly supported policies among voters of both parties. "European style" social welfare with a charismatic leader would get 60% of the votes in the US
Why do all of the posters making these "let's start a third party" suggestion have accounts less than a month old?
(Admittably, I've only encountered 2 of you so far, but still, what are the odds?)
Coincidence, or maybe Fediverse is experiencing a growth spike?
Coincidentally we're also both European, unable to grasp why Americans can't understand the mechanics for why people are willing to vote for Trump, Farage or the AFD.
Their bases are fairly similar, middle aged white men whom lost a job with good benefits to internationalism. Mostly through outsourcing production of goods.
Simultaneously they suffered a loss of status, which arguably is a good thing. As status is more even today across the sexes than ever, but it can be hard for some to cope through.
Furthermore the political system of all three mastodons highlighted here, are designed to ignore the few. So when the few yell foul about an issue, and nothing is done. More and more will eventually turn/agree with the issue and demand it solved.
Most other parties are to some degree in favour of a status quo, but when the status quo means the world around you is continuously getting worse - You're willing to aim for any silver linings that challenge the status quo. Even if it most likely will accelerate society downwards, just at the off chance it won't.
In systems that let's small parties show up, you're going to see most small parties die out again within a term or three. Because they're too extreme and the commoner will have seen them exposed before they get all the power. Well in the US and UK, there's nothing to expose before you have all the power.
Germany should be better, but the no collaboration with AFD stance completely fucked it, as even more people were mad a huge chunk of society essentially got ignored. By the time anyone were willing to talk to AFD, they were already the largest party in the country - Just like the MAGAs were.
If the Republican party had engaged the MAGAs when they had 2% support among the population, tackled their 2 biggest concerns and generally exposed their extreme ideologies - We would never have had a relevant MAGA movement. But ignoring the issues, gives extremism a chance to grow out of control.
Extremism doesn't show up out of nowhere, often they have a few good points for anyone willing to listen.
Maybe. A new, third party will at least not have the baggage from years of broken promises and empty lip service. Progressives have tried to work with the Dems since 2008 to no avail, so why still insist that this time will be any different?
Dems know the pickle Americans are in and have acted knowing that many will always give them their votes. Because what -- will you vote R? No? Then shut up and accept whatever shit we give you.
Non voters are berated for not exercising their democratic right, but can you blame someone who's lost hope of American politics? Obama's campaign was such a breath of fresh air, the victory from which gave Dems power to enact some real change. All they did was to bail out banks and fuel the dumpster fire that was Trump's election 2016. And during that election cycle, they forced a very unpopular candidate on their voters. When COVID saved them in 2020, they still gave Americans Joe Biden and continued down the same, rotten path.
Look at how they treated Zohran. I'm so glad he won because he shows that people want this kind of politics. If he was running for president, I think they would've tried their damnest to stop him.
So yeah, why should someone vote for them?
In my home country, the left party is sliding rightward, and this election I'm voting for a small party that actually stands for what I believe in. Some of my friends think I'm throwing my vote away, but my right to vote means my right to not be forced into making "mature" decisions about who I want to lead the country. That's been done for some 40 years now and has never worked. Enough is enough!
You bring up Zohran Mamdani. You do realize he won by first running in the democratic primary, instead of running third party? That they did do their worst to stop him, and he still succeeded rather decisively? You do realize, that if Mamdani had run third party instead, New York would have a republican Mayor now?
Yeah, but he was fought against by the Dems. His saving grace was Cuomo being the worst candidate you ever want running for you. And they still sided with Cuomo! Now imagine it was a presidential election and the Dems had a passable candidate. They would've done their all to stop Mamdani, and it wouldn't be far-fetched to think they'd succeed.
The Dems are not leftists, they're not progressive. They're a right wing party that doesn't give two shits about its people. People think they're progressive because they don't mind gay people or minorities within their ranks -- for now. And they think they're somewhat on the left because American politics is so fucked that there is no representation whatsoever for leftist politics.
Just because one person succeeded doesn't mean that more will. Zohran won because he's principled, skilled and faced a convicted rapist. So either hope for such odds every time, or start a new party with candidates that dont have an instant -100 in trustworthiness because of the D next to their names.
And whatever advantage is gained by not having a D next to your name (Mamdani certainly won despite having a D next to his name) would be lost by having to compete with both the Democrats and the Republicans.
A third party is not viable compared to coopting an existing party.
something something vanguard