politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The right wing has been pushing the Democratic Party to the right by making the Republicans more conservative/fascist. This pulls the Overton window to the right and the Democrats with it.
Socialism in the Democratic Party is the natural reaction to this pull. While welcome, the real solution is to do away with the two party system. Otherwise, it’s just a see-saw forever swinging back and forth.
How do envision getting from here to there?
I think it has to happen locally. Ranked choice voting (or similar) needs to be pushed through. Then, school boards, city/county councils and state elections.
People need to recognize and relate to new parties. National elections are not the way to do it (fuck you Stein and the American Green Party).
So I'm inferring you believe people will suddenly start voting for 3rd parties in order to then get voting reforms enacted, rather than voting reform being the necessary catalyst to making 3rd parties viable?
Just look at the numbers. At present there are a grand total of 3 (out of 535) federal legislators who are not either Democratic or Republican. Bernie Sanders ran in the Democratic primary for Senate in 2008, winning the nomination but then declining it to run as an Independent. Kevin Kiley was first elected as a Republican and then declared as Independent after several years in office. In all state legislatures combined, there are a total of 6 state senators and 22 state representatives out of 7,578 total state legislative seats.
Fewer than half of US states have a process for voters to initiate new legislation by direct ballot initiative (if you include voter-led veto ballot initiative of existing legislation, or state Constitutional amendments it's 26, but strictly for writing and passing new legislation it's 21).
https://ballotpedia.org/States_with_initiative_or_referendum
And 13 states have already banned RCV.
https://news.ballotpedia.org/2025/03/25/thirteen-states-have-now-banned-ranked-choice-voting-as-municipalities-decide-on-whether-to-adopt-it/
So I think we need the 3rd party candidates and voters to run and vote in the major party primaries in order to get elected. Like we've been seeing with DSA candidates winning Democratic primaries and previously Tea Party candidates winning Republican primaries. Either that or successfully calling a new Constitutional Convention to rewrite the whole damn thing, and I really don't think that will play out the way we would want it to in the current political climate.
Rank choice voting
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
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop%5C&v=O-dzK3YIAf8
Gotta win elections to ram that through, though.
Well, I'm not a one issue voter...but if someone says they'll implement rank choice voting than that tends to get my vote.
Are you using that metric to vote in the primary? Major party or 3rd party?
Well, I vote in a rank choice district, so all. But I want our politicians to get it to be federal
Nice. You're actually free to vote for 3rd parties!
What do you think of my observations on that in my other comment I'm this thread?
Accept that a centuries old constitution is totally outdated.
How do we action the acceptance? What actual step comes after that?
Just copy European countries that have renewed their constitutions as time passes instead of asking empty rhetorical questions.
Which of our existing processes do you think will produce the result you want? Passing an amendment through Congress seems quite unlikely with our current field of partisan legislators. We can't even meet the lower thresholds for passing legislation for things like raising minimum wage, which is supported by about 2/3 of the population. The Koch brothers were highly successful at stacking state legislatures with Tea Party nutjobs with the ultimate goal of calling for a Constitutional Convention to rewrite it. Republicans still control 28 state legislatures, and they're generally pretty beholden to Trump and the MAGA base, so I don't think we'd have a positive outcome with a Constitutional Convention.
So in my opinion, we need to have favorable majorities in our representation before we can have a favorable outcome with amending the Constitution. Do you have a different approach in mind?
You have this backwards, you're giving rhetorical answers to non-rhetorical questions.
I started by the need to acknowledge centuries-old constitutions are outdated. That is the first step. Get citizens being a push for change. No "existing process", that is the main point.
As stated, the first step is really to push the idea of rewriting a constitution.
If you don't have the people pushing, you are never getting a new document or a positive vote for such a document. And you won't even start to have a favorable majority for something that is not claimed.
Then people in power (elected or through a crisis caused by an uprising) can push a new constitution, with no care for the old document. This is how European countries have mostly done it.
Plus US is not facing a simple constitutional crisis, it is a religion-like crisis seeing how the document has been sanctified for so long. So no amending. Rewriting. And won't happen without a huge push for trashing the old one.
I'm asking what does that look like to you? Voting? Protesting in the streets and/or at the capitol buildings? Armed revolution?
My own belief is that it comes down to voting. We do not currently have a legal means for the people to directly initiate a Constitutional Convention. So we need state legislators who say they will vote to call for one, and federal legislators who say they will vote for Constitutional Amendments. But I don't want the current majorities to be in charge of that. We would just end up with a fully Christo-fascist Constitution given the makeup of the delegations. Most states don't have any means to recall legislators or for voters to directly initiate ballot initiatives to write new legislation. So we need to put better representatives in office first. My belief, as stated in other comment in this thread, is that we have to have 3rd party and independent candidates run in the major-party primaries, and we have to vote in those primaries for those candidates. We're seeing it work more and more for DSA-aligned candidates, so hopefully we can keep building on that momentum and finally get some real change.
First step is "propaganda" (I don't like the word but can't offer another one).
Then protests and voting. (None will be available solutions if citizens are not concerned first).
A new constitution in the current case needs a referendum to minimize risks. I totally agree with the christo-fascist risk if lead by the current gvt.
I think this is a short term way out (a good one) but won't solve the systemic issue caused by the constitution.
Totally agree with that.
🍻
🥂