Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Actually it is largely because to get elected president, you need an absolute majority in the electoral college.
by asdf on Mon Apr 8th, 2019 at 06:59:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I've explained here before, with gov links, how total electors are allocated to the states (by census) and how each party posts its caucus' set for purposes of FPTP, all or none, electors awarded.

If there were 9 or 50 party nominees for POTUS, there would be 9 or 50 sets of party electors.

Instead USA fosters a uniparty of two factions. (D) and (R) retard "third" or more party formation through control of states' boards of elections and secretaries of state. iirc, most of these functionaries are appointed.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Mon Apr 8th, 2019 at 07:53:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Sure, but there have been quite a few attempts at starting third parties. The problem comes in the electoral college where getting 34% (against the Ds getting 33% and the Rs getting 33%) is not enough to win. You need to get 51%.

Third parties have historically gotten less than 20% of the popular vote, and then because of the state-level manipulation you mention, they have ended up with an even smaller percentage in the electoral college.

The current movement to award state electoral college votes to the national popular vote winner will not change the 51% consideration.

by asdf on Mon Apr 8th, 2019 at 10:54:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Actually, Bill Clinton won with 43% as Perot siphoned off more votes from R's than from D's and only a plurality was required for Clinton's election. This also occurred in 1912 when TR ran on the Bull Moose ticket and Wilson won.


"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Tue Apr 9th, 2019 at 01:35:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's not about parties, it's about policies. D & R establishments are both pro-war, pro-pork, pro-Wall St, and pro-neoliberalism - essentially pro the right of the oligarchy to continue enclosing ever more of the world's wealth, for no particularly good reason.

The Rs are more pro-racism, and the Ds are more pro-identity-politics. But that's just red meat and tofu to distract the voters.

D&R fringes have more variety, with ideas that look suspiciously like social democracy on the D side, and like outright fascism on the R side.  But don't expect any serious change - or much hope - from either quarter.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Apr 9th, 2019 at 04:14:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It would be interesting to see what the democrats would do if they got solid control of the administration and congress. That has not been the situation since Reagan.
by asdf on Tue Apr 9th, 2019 at 05:13:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Split like the New York Senate?
by fjallstrom on Tue Apr 9th, 2019 at 06:09:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series