One pollster sees “flashing red” signs on youth turnout as Gen Z and millennial voters, who are not satisfied with either party, could again play a decisive role in the next election.
If voting was done once and never again, you would be correct. However, there is voting every two years, if people voted in a blocked and the Dems lost, they would be forced to change their policy to attract back lost voters. They have no incentive to change if you openly admit you will always vote blue.
Of course, this also requires that the messaging is clear, last time the Dems lost they blamed it on Russians and deplorables rather than the fact that they have totally sold out the working class.
It’s difficult to pull off no doubt, but it would actually work at reforming the system.
This doesn’t work when the party you allow to win will take away your vote and weaponize the justice department to a never before seen level. Just like how respect and norms don’t work at restraining fascists, neither does withholding your vote when fascists are so popular. If history has shown us anything, the dems are more likely to slide further right if better policies don’t win them more votes. Rich educated neolibs who want poor people to die, but not the gays, are a more consistent voting base then young people. If dems think they can steal more of those assholes from Republicans than bring out left wing dems, they’ll slide to the right.
Voting blocks are very successful at getting what they want, but they can only do that if their threat to not vote for the party in question is taken seriously. The NRA doesn’t get what it wants because it commits to always vote Republican no matter what.
I get your point of view, and my argument is overly idealized and difficult to implement, but I genuinely don’t see it working without the ability to use your vote to negotiate. Besides money, it is the only thing they care about. I’m not American, but from Canada, and I can tell you from an outsider’s perspective your two-party system looks completely dysfunctional. We basically have a three/four-party system for our federal gov and I’d take that any day over a two-party system. Granted America controls the reserve currency and the world army, so it was bound to consume itself at some point, maybe it doesn’t matter how it is set up.
I agree. Our system is terrible. We can form internal coalitions and vote for slightly better options in primaries, but because the enemy will actually kill us, we have to go with the shitty option in the end. The bigger issue is still the culture and propaganda, but the two party system kind of needs to exist because of the winner take all presidency.
If voting was done once and never again, you would be correct. However, there is voting every two years, if people voted in a blocked and the Dems lost, they would be forced to change their policy to attract back lost voters. They have no incentive to change if you openly admit you will always vote blue.
Of course, this also requires that the messaging is clear, last time the Dems lost they blamed it on Russians and deplorables rather than the fact that they have totally sold out the working class.
It’s difficult to pull off no doubt, but it would actually work at reforming the system.
Worked out so well in getting us a conservative dominated SC and has had consequences that will last a generation but sure, why not do it again
This doesn’t work when the party you allow to win will take away your vote and weaponize the justice department to a never before seen level. Just like how respect and norms don’t work at restraining fascists, neither does withholding your vote when fascists are so popular. If history has shown us anything, the dems are more likely to slide further right if better policies don’t win them more votes. Rich educated neolibs who want poor people to die, but not the gays, are a more consistent voting base then young people. If dems think they can steal more of those assholes from Republicans than bring out left wing dems, they’ll slide to the right.
Voting blocks are very successful at getting what they want, but they can only do that if their threat to not vote for the party in question is taken seriously. The NRA doesn’t get what it wants because it commits to always vote Republican no matter what.
I get your point of view, and my argument is overly idealized and difficult to implement, but I genuinely don’t see it working without the ability to use your vote to negotiate. Besides money, it is the only thing they care about. I’m not American, but from Canada, and I can tell you from an outsider’s perspective your two-party system looks completely dysfunctional. We basically have a three/four-party system for our federal gov and I’d take that any day over a two-party system. Granted America controls the reserve currency and the world army, so it was bound to consume itself at some point, maybe it doesn’t matter how it is set up.
I agree. Our system is terrible. We can form internal coalitions and vote for slightly better options in primaries, but because the enemy will actually kill us, we have to go with the shitty option in the end. The bigger issue is still the culture and propaganda, but the two party system kind of needs to exist because of the winner take all presidency.