Why hasn't a third party taken off in our Internet age?
Seems with discontent with both major parties and with the Internet available to get out your message, it seems sooner rather than later a viable third party should come into play.
Gotta admire the Libertarians for consistently getting their candidate on all 50 states every cycle, but I assume it's going to take a prominent person to head their ticket to gain any traction.
Replies to: Why hasn't a third party taken off in our Internet age?
Rs beat 41 by voting for Perot. Nader elected W. Own goals by nutters.
(no message)
Because we have a first-past-the-post voting system for President.
(no message)
Electoral college.
(no message)
Electoral College just prevents a few large cities from controlling the entire country.
It's the winner take all aspect of the presidential vote which means it is most efficient to have two parties.
A third party similar to Dems means the GOP wins; a third party similar to the GOP means the Dems win...either of which results in minority rule.
So, third parties harm themselves in such a system, because they end up empowering the party they are most different from. You gave examples of that above.
In parliamentary systems, the third, fourth and fifth parties can combine to form coalition governments...so they can still affect policy when they aren't first. Not so with FPTP or winner take all voting systems like ours.
Rather - minuscule populations control the majority.
(no message)
If you don't like the Constitution, you are free to lobby for an Article V Amendment.
But this is a side issue. My point about third parties stands.
The GOP exists due to three political realities. All anti majoritarian; the EC, the Senate, and
gerrymandering in the HOR.
The EC & Senate (even neutered by the 17th Am) have preserved Federalism, and the Republic.
Do away with those two things, and you destroy the Republic.
As to gerrymandering, both parties do it when they can, so I honestly don't see why you would mention it. I'm certainly no fan of it, but to pretend that the GOP does it more is insane. Some of the most heavily gerrymandered districts are Democrat districts. One of my favorites is Illinois's 4th Congressional District which is carefully structured to capture Hispanics so Illinois can send an Hispanic Congressman to D.C. They change it up every so often, but always to protect an Hispanic Congressman's seat.
Because in a duopoly, both parties collude to stifle competition-Pepsi/Coke
This explains in better than I can in a short post
Link: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-dont-we-have-better-candidates-for-president/
Because they are generally full of nutties like Iowa Cheeks.
(no message)
How does that make them different from what we get from the Republicans and Dems?
Psychologically healthy human beings do not go into politics. It’s a career for those seekimg external compensations for weak internal psychological structures… like entertainers.
Because the third party nutties are much more true believers than your average D or R who aren’t
that attracted to causes like the 3d party people. They may care about politics some, but not that much. MAGA is a 3d party that took over a major party.
^^^this^^^
(no message)
He reminds me of a guy who was a Hari Krishna in his younger days. Always looking for the path to
enlightenment through the latest flavor out there that’s different and weird.