Is it time for a 3rd party?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s absolutely time for a third party, to give centrist Dems someplace to go to get away from the leftie insanity that is driving the Democratic Party currently.

A party for Dems who are sick of the trans-craziness, the constant racializing everything, and knee-jerk opposition. But who still think the GOP is a dumpster fire.


Those people definitely need a new party.

Why do you even post your insanity here? Go back to stormfront or Fox News. The dems problem is the “moderates” and “centrist”. The reason the dems lost was because of Israel. The same Israel RWNJs that stabbed Biden and ten US in the back.

DP. LOL.

American voter breakdown (2022):

36% moderate
37% conservative
25% liberal

And you think that moving LEFT is the way to win? The math doesn't support your argument.

+100 if PP doesn't realize that the extreme left insanity of pronouns, cancel culture, constant racializing everything, social engineering mentality....DID PLAY A HUGE PART in the Democrats losing...well....you are in for a surprise.

I'm a female moderate. While I voted for Harris, I fundamentally agree with Trump's EO establishing male/female as the gender/sex. All the gender ideology, cancel culture, DEI social engineering cr*p was getting too extreme.

And I'll tell you this...it's not just my 50+ yr old generation who feels this way. And it's not just ultra-religious people who feel this way.

I know many GenZs who agree that this extreme left insanity is a big reason (although not the only reason) why we have Trump.
If above 2022 voter breakdown still holds true...you can bet your bottom dollar that a majority of the 36% moderates will not support moving back to the extreme left.

Completely agree. The left looks insane. All you have to do is go on social media to get a sense of what your average person thinks about all the weird stuff Democrats support.

To be fair, if you go on social media these days, then it usually tells you a lot more about who owns/runs the site than about what people believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

He’s right.

David Hogg doesn’t care about working people, union members, bringing manufacturing back to the US, protecting tech jobs here in America or anything else that Carville championed for the DNC. Hogg is only concerned with cozying up with billionaire donors, performative stunts for gun bans, and social media exposure. He’s everything that makes working people roll their eyes at democrat leadership now. He literally drives blue-collar voters away from the party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With the republicans totally off the rails and trying to destroy this country and go against the constitution, and it seems people have little confidence in the Dems maybe it’s time for a 3rd party to emerge? I feel like at this time it can gain momentum. Maybe something more centrist but on the socially progressive side.

The 3d party candidate, Jill Stein, is partially responsible for this mess. Just look at the Dearborn, MI district. She peeled off enough votes to hand it to Trump. So F her and those that voted for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the republicans totally off the rails and trying to destroy this country and go against the constitution, and it seems people have little confidence in the Dems maybe it’s time for a 3rd party to emerge? I feel like at this time it can gain momentum. Maybe something more centrist but on the socially progressive side.

The 3d party candidate, Jill Stein, is partially responsible for this mess. Just look at the Dearborn, MI district. She peeled off enough votes to hand it to Trump. So F her and those that voted for her.

You are part of the problem.

[Anonymous]

What we need is open primaries and ranked choice voting.

A third party under the current system simply can’t prevail and will only split the vote of the more moderate side, increasing the likelihood for the worst candidate to win (which in the current political reality means MAGA).

The structure of closed primaries has a built-in tendency to push party candidates to the extremes. Republicans choose between those who are somewhat right to far right, while Democrats choose from somewhat left to far left. As each sides average position gets moved further from the center, moderates are more likely to feel alienated from the party and consider themselves independents. Unfortunately, closed primaries leave independents without a voice in picking the candidates, forcing them to choose the lesser of two evils in the general election from those candidates nominated by partisans. Moreover, one of Trump’s biggest levers has been the threat of having any member of Congress who opposed him primaried out. If independents were able to vote in those primaries, you might have seen a little more bravery from Congress.

Ranked choice voting would allow voters to choose from a field of candidates. It might also give candidates the freedom to stray from party lines on issues. Imagine a Republican candidate who was for universal healthcare and gun control, or a Democrat who spoke against the excesses of DEI and was willing to examine their stance on trans issues.

The two parties are so ossified that neither side is really problem-solving, they’re just digging themselves deeper into entrenched positions, prioritizing talking points over practicalities. This leaves America to flounder between the two sides - never moving forward, just getting tossed back and forth.

[Anonymous]

Yep, because 3rd party worked so well in 2016.

I didn't think it at the time, but I now believe Musk fiddled with the 2024 election. I just don't think any Dems in power have/had the balls to stand up and say it because they don't want the flack from the other side who squawked stolen election for 4 years.

Third party didn't cost Harris like it did Clinton, but why does the official election data show the county has 156k registered voters yet 213,904 people cast a ballot in the presidential election. The math ain't mathing as the kids say.

[Anonymous]

No. It’s time to save our country. We can create more parties later.

[Anonymous]

Yes, please!!! Real Republican Party we can believe in with integrity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep, because 3rd party worked so well in 2016.

I didn't think it at the time, but I now believe Musk fiddled with the 2024 election. I just don't think any Dems in power have/had the balls to stand up and say it because they don't want the flack from the other side who squawked stolen election for 4 years.

Third party didn't cost Harris like it did Clinton, but why does the official election data show the county has 156k registered voters yet 213,904 people cast a ballot in the presidential election. The math ain't mathing as the kids say.

I hate to say this - But I think you are right about the vote muddling- I also think he is now muddling with approval ratings polls. I think this how he keeps him quiet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the republicans totally off the rails and trying to destroy this country and go against the constitution, and it seems people have little confidence in the Dems maybe it’s time for a 3rd party to emerge? I feel like at this time it can gain momentum. Maybe something more centrist but on the socially progressive side.

The 3d party candidate, Jill Stein, is partially responsible for this mess. Just look at the Dearborn, MI district. She peeled off enough votes to hand it to Trump. So F her and those that voted for her.

I’m originally from that area. It was either voting 3rd party or not at all for several. Maybe the DNC needs to really think about how to actually turn people on and not off as opposed to at least we aren’t openly as bad as the other side. So many minority people I know there are tired of being a vote without being heard. Or rather beinf told some out of touch person knows more about what that group is feeling and/or what they need. The DNC hears but has stopped listening.

Some of us saying we need a third party really mean we need to replace at least one or both of the current parties. Not necessarily have a three or more party system. The current ones are broken and we need a third to emerge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, absolutely, please start one OP.

The Democrats are in bed with the corporations.

That's why Bernie is a socialist.

We definitely need a party that's independent of corporate interests.

Please start one, OP. I'll join.

Do MoCo schools have a long weekend, so the HS trolls getting a jump on it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the republicans totally off the rails and trying to destroy this country and go against the constitution, and it seems people have little confidence in the Dems maybe it’s time for a 3rd party to emerge? I feel like at this time it can gain momentum. Maybe something more centrist but on the socially progressive side.

The 3d party candidate, Jill Stein, is partially responsible for this mess. Just look at the Dearborn, MI district. She peeled off enough votes to hand it to Trump. So F her and those that voted for her.

I’m originally from that area. It was either voting 3rd party or not at all for several. Maybe the DNC needs to really think about how to actually turn people on and not off as opposed to at least we aren’t openly as bad as the other side. So many minority people I know there are tired of being a vote without being heard. Or rather beinf told some out of touch person knows more about what that group is feeling and/or what they need. The DNC hears but has stopped listening.

Some of us saying we need a third party really mean we need to replace at least one or both of the current parties. Not necessarily have a three or more party system. The current ones are broken and we need a third to emerge.

No, absolutely not. Dems, like anybody, can always improve, but what is broken is one party forfeiting its responsibility to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic”. It’s their damn oath!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the republicans totally off the rails and trying to destroy this country and go against the constitution, and it seems people have little confidence in the Dems maybe it’s time for a 3rd party to emerge? I feel like at this time it can gain momentum. Maybe something more centrist but on the socially progressive side.

The 3d party candidate, Jill Stein, is partially responsible for this mess. Just look at the Dearborn, MI district. She peeled off enough votes to hand it to Trump. So F her and those that voted for her.

I’m originally from that area. It was either voting 3rd party or not at all for several. Maybe the DNC needs to really think about how to actually turn people on and not off as opposed to at least we aren’t openly as bad as the other side. So many minority people I know there are tired of being a vote without being heard. Or rather beinf told some out of touch person knows more about what that group is feeling and/or what they need. The DNC hears but has stopped listening.

Some of us saying we need a third party really mean we need to replace at least one or both of the current parties. Not necessarily have a three or more party system. The current ones are broken and we need a third to emerge.

No, absolutely not. Dems, like anybody, can always improve, but what is broken is one party forfeiting its responsibility to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic”. It’s their damn oath!

I can’t tell what party you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What we need is open primaries and ranked choice voting.

A third party under the current system simply can’t prevail and will only split the vote of the more moderate side, increasing the likelihood for the worst candidate to win (which in the current political reality means MAGA).

The structure of closed primaries has a built-in tendency to push party candidates to the extremes. Republicans choose between those who are somewhat right to far right, while Democrats choose from somewhat left to far left. As each sides average position gets moved further from the center, moderates are more likely to feel alienated from the party and consider themselves independents. Unfortunately, closed primaries leave independents without a voice in picking the candidates, forcing them to choose the lesser of two evils in the general election from those candidates nominated by partisans. Moreover, one of Trump’s biggest levers has been the threat of having any member of Congress who opposed him primaried out. If independents were able to vote in those primaries, you might have seen a little more bravery from Congress.

Ranked choice voting would allow voters to choose from a field of candidates. It might also give candidates the freedom to stray from party lines on issues. Imagine a Republican candidate who was for universal healthcare and gun control, or a Democrat who spoke against the excesses of DEI and was willing to examine their stance on trans issues.

The two parties are so ossified that neither side is really problem-solving, they’re just digging themselves deeper into entrenched positions, prioritizing talking points over practicalities. This leaves America to flounder between the two sides - never moving forward, just getting tossed back and forth.

Of course most American people would support ranked choice voting. The problem is, it would require cooperation from GOP and Dem legislators and administrators on the state and fed levels to make such a significant change to election protocols. Those in power currently have set rules to make it difficult for their power to be challenged and they aren't going to make changes to status quo that bring about unpredictability and uncertainty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What we need is open primaries and ranked choice voting.

A third party under the current system simply can’t prevail and will only split the vote of the more moderate side, increasing the likelihood for the worst candidate to win (which in the current political reality means MAGA).

The structure of closed primaries has a built-in tendency to push party candidates to the extremes. Republicans choose between those who are somewhat right to far right, while Democrats choose from somewhat left to far left. As each sides average position gets moved further from the center, moderates are more likely to feel alienated from the party and consider themselves independents. Unfortunately, closed primaries leave independents without a voice in picking the candidates, forcing them to choose the lesser of two evils in the general election from those candidates nominated by partisans. Moreover, one of Trump’s biggest levers has been the threat of having any member of Congress who opposed him primaried out. If independents were able to vote in those primaries, you might have seen a little more bravery from Congress.

Ranked choice voting would allow voters to choose from a field of candidates. It might also give candidates the freedom to stray from party lines on issues. Imagine a Republican candidate who was for universal healthcare and gun control, or a Democrat who spoke against the excesses of DEI and was willing to examine their stance on trans issues.

The two parties are so ossified that neither side is really problem-solving, they’re just digging themselves deeper into entrenched positions, prioritizing talking points over practicalities. This leaves America to flounder between the two sides - never moving forward, just getting tossed back and forth.

Of course most American people would support ranked choice voting. The problem is, it would require cooperation from GOP and Dem legislators and administrators on the state and fed levels to make such a significant change to election protocols. Those in power currently have set rules to make it difficult for their power to be challenged and they aren't going to make changes to status quo that bring about unpredictability and uncertainty.

+100

The powers that be determine status quo even in a democracy. There's money in a democracy that's used to get your way - those who don't get that are idiots. Democracy doesn't exist, not really. It's only legit in that there's no repercussions for doing what you dii ok but ultimately, your options exists because the powers that be allow those options.

The GOP and Dems have strong backing and do not want scales tipped to allow for someone - actual common folk - to decide who is in charge. A perfect example is Biden not being allowed to run before Hillary ran. Party comes before single candidates. Always.