this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
287 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19089 readers
6072 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mo_ztt@lemmy.world 133 points 1 year ago (5 children)

“American democracy simply cannot function without two equally healthy and equally strong political parties,” J Michael Luttig told CNN on Wednesday. “So today, in my view, there is no Republican party to counter the Democratic party in the country.

“And for that reason, American democracy is in grave peril.”

For that reason?

That's the reason?

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 60 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I think the real reason is that the people in power keep touting this idea of only two distinct parties. Having only two parties means you have only two directions to go. Which is destined for extremism.

[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The FPTP voting system reinforces that. Any third party is just going to be a spoiler for one of the majors without voting system reform.

[–] DarkGamer@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is the correct answer. Third parties are rarely viable in first-past-the-post systems. More info on Duverger's Law here.

If we had more viable parties it would be much harder to do regulatory capture and corrupt every party, and even if that happened new viable ones could spring up at any time. We might actually get candidates that represent diverse political opinions. With more parties one party would be unlikely to have a majority or supermajority, and our representatives would have to work together and form coalitions to get anything done. Politics wouldn't be a team sport about defeating the other side, it would be about shared goals and constructive legislation, and candidates would want to appeal to voters who they might be the second or third choice for, meaning scapegoating, vilifying and othering segments of society would be a losing strategy. Ranked choice voting has few downsides for anyone but those who want a corrupt system they can capture and a society they can divide.

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Lots of things reinforce it, the parties having a stranglehold on primaries and the media buyouts are also a major factor.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Go back a few years. Circa 1960, the two parties had both Liberal and Conservative wings. There was no shame in a pol voting with the other party.

[–] PaulDevonUK@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

You need a multi party system like a lot of countries round the world. No clear winner = who can quickly form the larges coalition. It usually boils down to two main parties with a lot of also-ran's.

Over here we even have The Monster Raving Loony pary!

[–] Fisk400@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Both the democratic and republican party are several smaller parties tied together into two disgusting rat king's. If one of them disappear today there will be an instant split of the surviving party into two new rat kings. The collapse isn't what they fear. They fear that the Overton window would move left.

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And even a big move to the left would still leave us leaning right.

[–] ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I think it’s very clear that the republicans in government are moving far right, but the electorate in general is steadily moving left.

Every year, about 4 million Americans turn 18 and gain the right to vote. In the eight years between the 2016 and 2024 elections, that’s 32 million new eligible voters.

Also every year, 2½ million older Americans die. So in the same eight years, that’s as many as 20 million fewer older voters.

Which means that between Trump’s election in 2016 and the 2024 election, the number of Gen Z (born in the late 1990s and early 2010s) voters will have advanced by a net 52 million against older people. That’s about 20 percent of the total 2020 eligible electorate of 258 million Americans.

And unlike previous generations, Gen Z votes. Comparing the four federal elections since 2015 (when the first members of Gen Z turned 18) with the preceding nine (1998 to 2014), average turnout by young voters (defined here as voters under 30) in the Trump and post-Trump years has been 25 percent higher than that of older generations at the same age before Trump — 8 percent higher in presidential years and a whopping 46 percent higher in midterms.

https://archive.ph/3Ydkn

And according to voter data. Gen z is very progressive especially on policy:

https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/The-Exit-Polls.pdf?x91208

In 15-20 years nearly half of all boomers will be dead. The current gop can’t win a single national popular vote. Without half these boomers, they will collapse or move left. And the Overton window will shift considerably left. And with Europe moving right in a lot of counties, I’d say it wouldn’t be surprising to see the US as left as Europe in a shot time.

Also: Europe is not as left leaning as people tend to think. Aside from trains and healthcare they’re not all the left wing. And it is moving right. I’m an Italian citizen and I see it happening in Italy, and many other counties.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Both our parties are pretty far right talking about economics. Republicans are going full authoritarian/fascist. While Democrats grip on social democracy are becoming tenuous.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

This analysis comforts me, but I heard a conflicting anecdote that suggested gen z was starting to lean more right (culturally right). I have no data to back that up, but thinking about that risk makes me not want to be complacent. 2016 still looms large in my head

[–] dx1@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Or worse, leaning up or down. We might all become textbook examples of anger prisoners.

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

party systems come and go. ours is almost over, and the republican party's death will be the cause

[–] 520@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He's got a point. The Republican party is fundamentally not healthy at all.

[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yes, but the framing of it reads like the Democratic party being too powerful is the worst possible outcome, rather than the Republican party destroying society.

[–] 520@kbin.social -2 points 1 year ago

Any one party becoming too powerful is the worst possible outcome, especially in what is effectively a two party system.

Sure it might start off good, but as soon as they're comfortable with the fact that people will vote them in regardless, they will eventually stop following the will of the people.

[–] downpunxx@kbin.social 87 points 1 year ago

Bullshit. Institutionalized racism, misogyny, homophobia, and white Christian separatism as party platform. No matter how "conservative" Republicans claimed to be, The Southern Strategy was the core value and singular driving force for the past 60 years. MAGA isn't a symptom, it's result

[–] the_frumious_bandersnatch@programming.dev 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A political party is a collection and assemblage of individuals who share a set of beliefs and principles and policy views about the United States of America.

Remember when the Republican party simply didn't put out a party platform running up to the 2020 election? They released a one page document that just said "We stand for whatever Donald Trump wants." That was weird, huh?

[–] blivet@artemis.camp 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That was the point where the Republicans ceased even pretending to be a normal political party and embraced their new identity as a fascist death cult. They don’t even have a platform. They literally stand for nothing.

[–] theodewere@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

they just run around looking for someone to try to bully, or some child to put to work

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Wait, seriously? That happened?

[–] Rottcodd@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

As an old guy, I'd have to agree, though as a leftist turned anarchist, I don't give much of a fuck.

I think back though on the Republicans of my youth, and it really was a notably different party.

It's sort of weird to phrase it like this, but they were assholes with principles. I mean - they were shallow, bigoted assholes then too, but it was more common then for them to still be like the old '50s All-American cliche - patriotic, proud, moral, hard-working, honest... conservative in the old sense of the word. I didn't agree with them at all but at least they had a relatively coherent, if shallow and ignorant, ideology that they generally actually lived by.

Somehow though, especially over the last 20 years or so, they've morphed into this bizarre and startlingly toxic mix of psychopaths, hypocrites and grifters. They have no principles at all really - just things and people that they hate - and it's not even vaguely about trying to accomplish things that they sincerely (if mistakenly) think will make the world a better place, but just about fucking over everyone else. And even themselves, if they can colorably believe that by doing so they'll manage to fuck someone else over even more.

I sincerely believe it's a sort of collective mental illness, and truth be told, I think it can only lead to the collapse of western civilization, and the US in particular. There's nothing really that can stop it. It's effectively a closed loop in which greedy psychopaths fuck things up for their own profit and privilege, ignorant psychopaths look for someone to blame for the fact that things are fucked up, power-hungry psychopaths point them at some vulnerable fringe group and tell them that it's all their fault, then while everyone's distracted, the greedy psychopaths fuck things up even more. And 'round and 'round it goes, like a turd circling a toilet bowl. And there's only one way that can end.

[–] DarkGamer@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

There's nothing really that can stop it.

Things that can stop it:

  • The passage of time, Republicans skew older*
  • The death of religion, the irreligious are unlikely to vote Republican* and Americans are moving away from religion
  • Education, those with degrees tend to vote Democratic*
  • Election reform that doesn't give outsized power to rural states
  • Legal consequences for lying to the public in the guise of news
  • Ranked choice voting that allows for viable political competition from other parties both on the right and left

*https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/07/12/demographic-profiles-of-republican-and-democratic-voters/

What does the opposite of stopping it:

  • Fatalism that makes the good people who outnumber the bad not show up to vote
[–] Hector_McG@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
  • Fatalism that makes the good people who outnumber the bad not show up to vote

It’s the same as the “all politicians are the same” moan.

No, they’re not. It’s the crooked ones that want you to believe that they’re all the same, because that’s what keeps the crooked ones from being voted out.

[–] Hazzia@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I certainly hope that the fact that the current president isn't acting simultanously like a toddler and a cult leader, but acting with decorum and attempting to negotiate with the other party to get what he wants instead of berating, yelling, and and inciting mobs on social media, hopefully that convinced enough people to think "oh shit maybe I should actually pay atrention to politics - wouldn't want that shit happening again

[–] CapgrasDelusion@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Election reform that doesn't give outsized power to rural states

I completely agree with you about voter apathy, but this one in particular I don't know how you get past. You need 2/3rds just to get an amendment for it up for a vote that you then need 3/4 of each state to pass. As long as a quarter or more of states are rural we're kind of screwed on that one. I don't see it happening in my lifetime at least.

The rest are spot on. Also, Jack Fucking Smith. It's not just the news that needs consequences.

[–] Rottcodd@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

It should be noted that the last three of those things require the exercise of authority to enact, and that authority is vested in people and institutions that flatly will not exercise it in pursuit of things that will in any way undermine their privilege or that of their wealthy cronies and patrons, and all of those things would do just that.

This is where it becomes relevant that the Democrats are only relatively less corrupt than the Republicans. They feed at the same corporate trough as the Republicans - they just have to, and do, play a somewhat different game to stay in office and maintain their privilege.

The Democrats have already demonstrated that when they have uncontested power - the presidency and congressional majorities - they will still find a way to fail to actually deliver. That's not just supposition - it's established fact. It's what they've already done. There's certainly no reason to believe that they're going to do any differently in the future.

Now that's not to say or imply that I disagree with you fundamentally. The first half of your list would at least slow the decline and putting Democrats in office would be broadly better than putting Republicans in office.

But the Democrat establishment, and the DNC in particular, is too corrupt and too compromised to provide more than token opposition to the oligarchy.

Elsewhere in this thread, a poster wrote of the possibility of the Republicans self-destructing snd the Democrats fragmenting. I don't think that's particularly likely, but it is attractive, since it would serve not only to eliminate the most overtly corrupt and destructive party but to provide a rallying point for those who call for genuine reform - the handful of actually decent politicians of the AOC/Sanders type could potentially have some real influence instead of just being lone voices made ineffectual by their subservience to a well-established and thoroughly corrupt party hierarchy.

Again though, I don't think it's at all likely.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I’m an old guy who also turned anarchist. I unfortunately agree with you. But I’m gonna fight the fascism as long as I can. These kids deserve better.

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Former judge. Regardless, at this point, if you're still holding on to the label "Republican" for yourself, you're complicit.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


American democracy has by most measures been in grave peril since 6 January 2021, the day Pence, as vice-president, took Luttig’s advice and refused to attempt to block congressional certification of Joe Biden’s election win.

Trump, 77, pleaded not guilty, as he has to 74 other criminal counts, in New York over hush-money payments to a porn star and federally regarding his retention of classified information.

In New York this week, regarding a civil suit in which Trump was found liable for defamation and sexual assault, a judge said it was not defamatory to call the former president a rapist.

Nonetheless, Trump leads Ron DeSantis of Florida, Pence and the rest of the field by more than 30 points, firmly on course to face Biden again.

Luttig told CNN: “A political party is a collection and assemblage of individuals who share a set of beliefs and principles and policy views about the United States of America.

A respected conservative judge who was considered for the supreme court under George W Bush, Luttig made a tremendous impact with his January 6 testimony.


I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] tallwookie@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

so what does he want to call it then? can we go back to Whigs? that was a fun party.

[–] toiletobserver@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Leopards ate my face material