Support for Third U.S. Political Party Up to 63%
Support for Third U.S. Political Party Up to 63%
Sixty-three percent of Americans say a third U.S. political party is needed, up from 56% a year ago and by one percentage point the highest in Gallup's 20-year trend.
Story Highlights
- Third time support has exceeded 60%, along with 2017 and 2021
- Republicans primarily behind the increase, with 58% now in favor
- Political independents remain group most likely to favor third party
You're viewing a single thread.
If only the politicians in the dominant parties had any incentive to make elections fair for all parties. As it stands, the dominant parties have too many systems in place to give themselves advantages.
Rank choice voting seems like an obvious upgrade to our current voting system but is nowhere to be found other than a couple states.
There’s like 12 imperfect voting systems that are still light years better than our current system. I wish we would just pick one and roll with it already, even if it’s a temporary fix.
Approval voting is mathematically sane, rewards candidates that are broadly acceptable rather than extremists, and is easy to explain to voters: "Vote for every candidate whom you would be okay with."
Candidates get more votes by building big tents than fanatical bases; voters maximize their power by honestly representing their views, and (unlike IRV) there's no case where thinking better of a candidate will lead you to vote in a way that causes that candidate to lose.
Rank choice voting seems like an obvious upgrade to our current voting system but is nowhere to be found other than a couple states.
Because the two "private parties" have an insane amount of control over our political system.
And both of them count on getting a large amount of votes because people hate the other side.
If there's literally any viable third option it fucks their system up, which would take power away from the people leading those private organizations
For example, say a far right party shows up. That hurts republicans, but it means Dems would win in landslides. Once that happens, Dem voters are going to start demanding things get done. Which means we're suddenly going to have more Manchin's voting against the party. Leading to increased primary challenges and maybe even a viable progressive party.
Both parties have a bunch of reasons to keep the status quo
How would you suggest elections be made "fair for all parties"? Hell, just look at republican primaries or basically all the California recall debates for what happens when you let complete randos use televised debates to advertise their personal brand.
Ranked Choice comes up and, while there are definite concerns over it making the "crazy second choice" candidate too viable, I generally like it.
But also? We already more or less have that. Both major parties (I think also most of the "independent" parties?) have a primary where party members can select the nominee from those running. And, in a lot of cases, that results in the eventual winner shifting to cover some of the runner up's policies as a concession. And... that basically is the same end result. Because I am not going to pick Biden first, trump second. I am going to pick Biden first, Bernie second, etc. I would theoretically prefer to have unaffiliated voters (or even everyone) be able to engage with those primaries but also understand how that would be abused.
Personally? I am a big supporter of better education on how the government works (and why local and state elections are actually much more important than presidential...), removal of the electoral college, and general efforts to re-enfranchise voters.
Primaries are nothing like ranked choice voting in the outcomes they produce.
I believe the only reason a "crazy second choice" exists is because we have such limited options to choose from when voting.
With rank choice voting, more candidates could run within a party without competing for votes because you would be able to vote for all of your favorite people in order without worrying what party they fall into.
We could vote for people we like instead of voting to avoid the person we hate.
But also? We already more or less have that. Both major parties (I think also most of the “independent” parties?) have a primary where party members can select the nominee from those running
Those are a formality...
There is no law that would force a party to run the person who won their primary.
After the last couple of years, I struggle to understand how people think that's "good enough".