I think there’s plenty of Americans that are just fucking sick of both parties and government overreach even if they don’t agree on all left vs right issues.
How about we finally start working towards a 3rd party? All these fucks that scammed Americans by talking about removing unnecessary regulations literally only removed the necessary ones and created some new ones in addition. I vote civil libertarian. Our slogan can be just respect civil rights and liberties, and stay the fuck out of everyone else’s business.
Can’t do shit with the winner takes all, first past the post abomination that is the US system. We need hundreds more senators, absolute defeat of gerrymandering, a dozen more sc justices, ranked choice and the abolishment of the electoral college.
How about we start with a just few 3rd party congressmen? That can’t be too hard, right? 3 or 4 congressmen not beholden to either party. I’m sure there’s at least a couple districts out there that the majority could be swayed if enough focus was put on them.
Then we elect a few more.
Then maybe a senator.
Now suddenly this 3rd party starts getting some attention. It’s still by no means a majority, but that’s enough congressional votes to give them a seat at the table. When votes are so split and close these days, even a small number of votes can throw things out of order. Demands can start being made.
I’m with you on ranked choice, gerrymandering, and electoral college, but I don’t really know how adding more government or senators or SC judges really fixes anything in the long term.
I think the people need to be given more power not the government.
For example, when any government official violates their sworn duties, that should be a much bigger deal than it is. we need to do a better job of holding people’s feet to the fire. When Alito flew that flag on Jan 6, that should have been an automatic chance for the people of this country to schedule a vote and demand his removal. This SC justice for life shit needs some stipulations.
Part of the appeal for more sc justices/more house of rep members, etc is twofold:
It reduces an individual lawmaker’s power and (in the house of rep’s case) makes an individual rep much easier for the public to pressure as they will be beholden to fewer constituents per rep (less constituents, the less support you need in order to rally people to oust the incumbent).
It makes corrupting the government with money a little bit harder: more reps = more people you need to pay off, and it’s not like every additional vote you need only costs $1 or smth, we’re talking you need to get everyone enough money to keep them on board, which could be an extra couple million/billion than corrupting people now.
That being said: you’re right, we need more than just that. We need avenues to hold votes of non-confidence (which will both allow us to get rid of bad/not helpful public servants, and also force politicians to stop straight-up lying on the stump). We need to institute public funding of elections to keep things both balanced and less-easily corrupted. We need to end gerrymandering. We need term limits.
You’re right, but they said senators, not house reps, for a reason. I have to infer they want hundreds more senators in conjunction with proportional representation being introduced to the Senate. Right now it’s two Senators per state which makes absolutely no sense on any level. The will of less than a million people in Wyoming is equal to the will of multiple millions in other states.
How about we finally start working towards a 3rd party?
What do you mean “finally”? People have been trying that over and over and failing for over 100 years. It would be great to have a multiparty system, but there are unintended structural forces in place that will always prevent that. None of us alive today created this system. We are all stuck with it just like you. But ignoring reality just makes someone into a lifetime loser. There is nothing you can gain by making yourself into a lifetime loser.
As far as I’m aware, most 3rd parties in the U.S. have been some kind of offshoot of the 2 party system rather than an actual uprising of We the People are tired of being led by losers. We all agree on some very basic shit and this other stuff has been a distraction that led us to this point so we could be divided and conquered…
Let’s agree to the basic shit, revolt against these dickheads and rebuild something better as Americans.
But ignoring reality just makes someone into a lifetime loser. There is nothing you can gain by making yourself into a lifetime loser.
He says, in a thread about how the party is so devoted to the losing strategy of pandering right and punching left that it’s trying to oust its own vice chair.
Because the parties aren’t the main problem. The entire system they’ve built is the problem.
We don’t need reform. We need revolution. The only real purpose of our involvement in the electoral system at this point is recruitment, and showing people that the system cannot be reformed. I agree we should continue to push third parties and try to create energetic campaigns behind them, with the primary goal being to force the parties to rig it and show their hand.
I think it depends what you mean by revolution, bc DOGE/Yarvin/Thiel and the Heritage Foundation believe what they’re doing is revolution, but really it’s just removing protections for people and creating new regulations that cement their power grab.
They also will scream non stop what they’re doing is to increase transparency, but it’s actually just distracting people by pointing the finger at others and hiding what they’re really doing in the shadows
It’s what the Heritage Foundation did in Russia in the early 90s. Removing protections bc you think they’re inefficient only allows the people they were protecting you from to swoop in and take control just like they were hoping for
I’m speaking of a socialist revolution. Not a fascist takeover.
So a Communist takeover. Not much difference in that and a fascist takeover.
“Revolutions” serve people.
Then how come the Russian revolution and the Iranian revolution and the Chinese revolution all killed millions of people much of whom were selected randomly? Why would an unaccountable government that doesn’t allow people to chose their own leaders be more likely rather than far less likely to “serve people”
I think there’s plenty of Americans that are just fucking sick of both parties and government overreach even if they don’t agree on all left vs right issues.
How about we finally start working towards a 3rd party? All these fucks that scammed Americans by talking about removing unnecessary regulations literally only removed the necessary ones and created some new ones in addition. I vote civil libertarian. Our slogan can be just respect civil rights and liberties, and stay the fuck out of everyone else’s business.
Multiparty system does not work. We should just eliminate parties 100%.
Maybe then I can vote for someone who has a chance of winning, because if they have a R or D next to their name now I will not vote for them
Can’t do shit with the winner takes all, first past the post abomination that is the US system. We need hundreds more senators, absolute defeat of gerrymandering, a dozen more sc justices, ranked choice and the abolishment of the electoral college.
How about we start with a just few 3rd party congressmen? That can’t be too hard, right? 3 or 4 congressmen not beholden to either party. I’m sure there’s at least a couple districts out there that the majority could be swayed if enough focus was put on them.
Then we elect a few more.
Then maybe a senator.
Now suddenly this 3rd party starts getting some attention. It’s still by no means a majority, but that’s enough congressional votes to give them a seat at the table. When votes are so split and close these days, even a small number of votes can throw things out of order. Demands can start being made.
I’m with you on ranked choice, gerrymandering, and electoral college, but I don’t really know how adding more government or senators or SC judges really fixes anything in the long term.
I think the people need to be given more power not the government.
For example, when any government official violates their sworn duties, that should be a much bigger deal than it is. we need to do a better job of holding people’s feet to the fire. When Alito flew that flag on Jan 6, that should have been an automatic chance for the people of this country to schedule a vote and demand his removal. This SC justice for life shit needs some stipulations.
Part of the appeal for more sc justices/more house of rep members, etc is twofold:
It reduces an individual lawmaker’s power and (in the house of rep’s case) makes an individual rep much easier for the public to pressure as they will be beholden to fewer constituents per rep (less constituents, the less support you need in order to rally people to oust the incumbent).
It makes corrupting the government with money a little bit harder: more reps = more people you need to pay off, and it’s not like every additional vote you need only costs $1 or smth, we’re talking you need to get everyone enough money to keep them on board, which could be an extra couple million/billion than corrupting people now.
That being said: you’re right, we need more than just that. We need avenues to hold votes of non-confidence (which will both allow us to get rid of bad/not helpful public servants, and also force politicians to stop straight-up lying on the stump). We need to institute public funding of elections to keep things both balanced and less-easily corrupted. We need to end gerrymandering. We need term limits.
You’re right, but they said senators, not house reps, for a reason. I have to infer they want hundreds more senators in conjunction with proportional representation being introduced to the Senate. Right now it’s two Senators per state which makes absolutely no sense on any level. The will of less than a million people in Wyoming is equal to the will of multiple millions in other states.
What do you mean “finally”? People have been trying that over and over and failing for over 100 years. It would be great to have a multiparty system, but there are unintended structural forces in place that will always prevent that. None of us alive today created this system. We are all stuck with it just like you. But ignoring reality just makes someone into a lifetime loser. There is nothing you can gain by making yourself into a lifetime loser.
As far as I’m aware, most 3rd parties in the U.S. have been some kind of offshoot of the 2 party system rather than an actual uprising of We the People are tired of being led by losers. We all agree on some very basic shit and this other stuff has been a distraction that led us to this point so we could be divided and conquered…
Let’s agree to the basic shit, revolt against these dickheads and rebuild something better as Americans.
He says, in a thread about how the party is so devoted to the losing strategy of pandering right and punching left that it’s trying to oust its own vice chair.
Because the parties aren’t the main problem. The entire system they’ve built is the problem.
We don’t need reform. We need revolution. The only real purpose of our involvement in the electoral system at this point is recruitment, and showing people that the system cannot be reformed. I agree we should continue to push third parties and try to create energetic campaigns behind them, with the primary goal being to force the parties to rig it and show their hand.
I think it depends what you mean by revolution, bc DOGE/Yarvin/Thiel and the Heritage Foundation believe what they’re doing is revolution, but really it’s just removing protections for people and creating new regulations that cement their power grab.
They also will scream non stop what they’re doing is to increase transparency, but it’s actually just distracting people by pointing the finger at others and hiding what they’re really doing in the shadows
It’s what the Heritage Foundation did in Russia in the early 90s. Removing protections bc you think they’re inefficient only allows the people they were protecting you from to swoop in and take control just like they were hoping for
I’m speaking of a socialist revolution. Not a fascist takeover.
I don’t care what they want to call it. “Revolutions” serve people. Not demagogues.
So a Communist takeover. Not much difference in that and a fascist takeover.
Then how come the Russian revolution and the Iranian revolution and the Chinese revolution all killed millions of people much of whom were selected randomly? Why would an unaccountable government that doesn’t allow people to chose their own leaders be more likely rather than far less likely to “serve people”