Submitted by DethKnotWurst t3_yo7wki in newhampshire
pahnzoh t1_ivex49x wrote
Reply to comment by ThisIsNotTuna in We can't afford Don Bolduc! by DethKnotWurst
There isn't one that will win. I'd vote for a libertarian if they had a chance. They don't under our stupid two party system of government.
ThisIsNotTuna t1_ivf69rp wrote
They don't have a chance because hardly anyone bothers to vote for a third (or forth) option. And that attitude keeps it so.
pahnzoh t1_ivf6r85 wrote
I do agree, but it's a collective action problem. A vote for a third party takes away a vote from the lesser of two evil parties as you perceive it. I can't control how others vote.
I personally think the entire system is flawed and routinely say that. I don't think we should be voting in this way at all. But it's a defensive mechanism against the state using it's powers against us. I'm forced to vote for the person who will do that the least if I want my vote to have any effect, if it even does at all.
ThisIsNotTuna t1_ivf8sjg wrote
>I'm forced to vote for the person who will do that the least if I want my vote to have any effect, if it even does at all.
I don't know that I agree with this entirely. I don't recall who originally said it. But there's a saying.. "Be the change you want to see".
Look, one day, this system will either be redefined, amended, or obliterated entirely if we're not careful. Obviously, the change can't happen overnight. But I am repulsed by the notion that we're forced into voting in a binary sort of way; which, as history is showing us, isn't exactly working for everyone.
But I dunno. I'm not exactly a political guy, so I'm still learning the more I read up on things. The only thing I am sure of is....we can't keep doing what we've always done and expect a different result.
pahnzoh t1_ivfb1de wrote
Oh yes I agree that people voting for either Democrats or Republicans is going to change anything apparently don't pay attention.
I hate politics, but it's basically the idea that people are out there organizing to put rulers in power to use the government to create systems of control and expropriation. Unfortunately that works against us so the only thing you can do as an individual is vote for the people that want to do it less.
And in a system designed with 51% needed to pass legislation, you end up with competing factions like we have today.
petrified_eel4615 t1_ivf8w6t wrote
Not so. There is something called Duverger's Law that basically states that in a FPTP/winner takes all system, the "optimal" solution is two parties - smaller parties get absorbed into whichever is closer to them, because their chances of winning and modifying the behaviors of the two major parties increases.
If you want to get more parties, switch to instant runoff or Condorcet or another form of proportional representation.
ThisIsNotTuna t1_ivkimfb wrote
That sort of reinforces my point. The reason third party candidates have no chance of winning is because....voters believe third party candidates have no chance of winning.
But since I'm not much of a politically savvy guy (at least I admit it), I'm just gonna leave this here, as it better explains why so many voters are disillusioned with the two party system.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments