Ranked choice voting open to all.
RCV is just one of many alternative voting systems that has alot of warts. I think there are better options that should be explored:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison/_of/_electoral/_systems
It has already been preemptively made illegal in several states.
Hey Democrats and Republicans, will you allow for the possible destruction of your parties? No? ...oh
Remind me which party is the one that wants to send armed enforcers to voting places?
Ranked choice pls
RCV is just one of many alternative voting systems that has alot of warts. I think there are better options that should be explored:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison/_of/_electoral/_systems
alaska has it and lets just say the independant candidates can be weird
Weirder than the Epstein class!?
GOOD.
You suggest that the main party candidates can't be?
the main party candidates generally don't sue their ex husbands over vaccinating their kids
We're also open to executing politicians for treason when they hold more allegiance to money and Israel than the people they represent.
Like seriously NPR. Clean it up a bit and ask that fucking question. Report on how many people you interview agree with that sentiment.
Report on actual sentiment.
One of the biggest issues I see on the ground is that voters aren't stepping up. This is even at the local level. This is a problem all across the USA. Good people aren't willing to run for a lot of these local offices. Nobody's preparing the next generation / replacements to take over once older candidates age out or move up the chain. Then even if you get multiple people to run for a local office, these voters who are supposedly tired of the 2 party system don't volunteer, donate, or even bother to show up to events where the candidates are making themselves available for dialog. They aren't interacting with candidates' social media. So realistically, if voters don't change, nothing's going to change about the 2-party system.
Challenge mutual exclusion in political parties. In the US we vote for the person, not the party. Why can't I belong to more than one political party?
The problem I see is meaningful change to the voting system requires a constitutional amendment which is a high bar. Political parties are not in the constitution. Getting rid of mutual exclusion just requires a good legal argument...
Most people in the United States don't vote for the person over the party they vote for the party. If the Republican and they have an r by their name that's the person that's going to get their vote no matter who etc.
But still, it's nowhere in the constitution beyond Right to peaceably assemble and the right to petition the government. The way I look at it, you would still have the two parties as a necessity. Otherwise no candidate gets 50% of the vote, and congress decides who becomes president. That is not going to change without a constitutional amendment. All the 3rd parties would be more like influencers to the main two. When looking at a primary, one might be a progressive party member/democrat or a green/democrat and who they chose to vote for could be influenced by the 3rd party endorsements. We don't have to have a parliamentary like party system as we do not have that organizational structure.
The 2 party system only works for business and power. We need a system that works for the people.
They’re open to big changes because corporations have captured our political parties and neither party answers to the population, you know, like a functional democracy. Citizens United and deregulation of corporations is where things went wrong.
Two parties? Who is the second party?
The two-party system in the United States consists of "Republicans" and "Everyone else".
"Evil Light" I think.
Our de facto two party system isn't statutory. It's not written in the constitution that there can only be two parties. It's just the natural consequence of a winner-take-all, first-past-the-post election system. All a candidate has to do is win 51% of the votes to get 100% of the political power. It makes third party candidates essentially nonviable. That's what would need to change if we want to ditch the two party system.
This can be done on local level but on national level you would need constitutional reform which is extremely unlikely.
This is probably the second worse time to have a movement like this.
The only time I could think that it would be worse is splitting the left wing vote before the 2028 elections.
This article isn't about having more parties within the same electoral system (which indeed does not make sense), but changing the electoral system to make more parties viable.
Great. When exactly is a good time to fix this broken system?
Oh, the same time as party building - while nobody is engaged at all.
The same was said in 2024. And 2020. And 2016. And every election before that.
Drutman found that 6 in 10 Trump voters who have an opinion on proportional representation said they back it, too….
Okay, but like, what tiny percentage of those people could understand the concept, much less have an opinion about it? heh
Ranked Choice Voting. If anyone is curious just know that it's illegal in some places in USA. Similar with general work striking.
general work striking is actually illegal across all of the US unfortunately. The Taft–Hartley Act actually forbids solidarity strikes as a whole, which is what a general strike is. It also forbids secondary strikes, which is someone boycotting or striking to show support for another strike or group.
It's really sad the amount of rights that the country has stripped away from it's standard working class.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News