Hacker News Reader

Comment by spicymaki | Hacker News Reader

This is correct. That is why I changed from independent to an actual political party. There is no point, it is highly improbable that I would ever vote for the party that is against my values. The two main US political parties are diametrically opposed.

View on HN

No, they each manufacture consent for capital interests in a race to the bottom for everybody else, using time-tested good cop / bad cop, revolving door corruption, etc.

I've never understood why I should join a political party. I mean, yes, I lean pretty heavily toward one of the two major parties in my voting, but what advantage does it get me to declare loyalty? Perhaps if I lived in a state without open primaries, but as it is I gain nothing by putting an R or a D in front of my name.

No, you are cutting off the nose to spite the face. Clearly if you lean heavily toward one of the two major parties, you should want to influence the party you lean to in some way.

So, vote for a third party. If you don't actually like the candidate you vote for, you're engaging in political negligence. When I vote, I almost never vote for a Republican or Democrat candidate because they are, by and large, not people I want representing me. So I vote for someone I do want representing me.

Voting 3rd party is throwing away your vote in the US electoral system. The reason is structural. Currently, I believe there are two independent senators and one independent representative. Independents are not another party they are just unenrolled and they all caucus with one of the two major parties. There is no third party representation in congress.

Less than one third of eligible voters vote. Your espousing a self fulfilling prophecy.

The only reason party politics exists is because of you and people like you who keep spouting this lie that keeps them in power.

So instead of lying just say that you fully agree with everything both parties do and thats why you keep them in power and refuse to vote for someone rather than against.

The two party system is the game theoretic result of first past the post. No amount of wishing will change that.

I understand this logic, but voting third-party should be reserved for democracies that are healthier than the US’s. When the only choice is a flawed but sane person or an extremist, a third-party vote is effectively a vote for the extremist. Your conscience is not as clean as you think it is, because you had the option to stop an extremist and didn’t take it.

That can work, if you are strategic about it. If your candidate is polling at 5%, you might as well have not voted at all.

Something I read once, probably 50 years ago now: you may not see a candidate you want to vote for, but you will probably see a candidate you want to vote against.

The parties arent actually opposed its just that democrats want to change everything and republicans dont. Dems propose something and reps oppose it. Thats generally how its supposed to work but usually there is a debate that should accompany the proposals.

The general difference between a liberal mindset and a conservative mindset is the difficulty in making things work. Liberals believe that things usually work and the hard part is getting them to work exactly how you want them too. The conservatives think that things usually dont work and the difficult part is getting them to actually work.

This actually really matters when your talking about renovations whether its a building or a government you have to choose between the new fancy shiny thing will all the options and the old beaten up reliable thing that only does one thing and does it really well.

When dems propose something new, all the reps see is every way that it could go wrong or even be worse than the last thing.

When reps oppose something new all dems see is stupid old people afraid of progress.

And thats assuming that everyone actually has good intentions before we get into partisan bs and outright corruption.

The dem-rep balance would actually be really great in the politicians gave half a fuck about the country but they arent trying to make the country better in good faith they are trying to win politics which isnt even possible, a win for one party means the end of the country no matter which party the country needs the balance i just laid out above. You need long term trusted institutions and you also need to change and update things over time. Both perspectives are necessary if you want a functional government this petty infighting serves no purpose besides allowing politicians and their corrupt friends to loot and pillage the country from the inside while the stupid population argues over men in womens sports or when child sacrifice is okay.

Can you seriously look around at the wild policy swings we observe and say that Reps want the status quo?

If yes, you might want to look at your information environment.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com