beige.party

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

NekodojoMeasuring <a href="https://tech.lgbt/tags/ThirdParty" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#ThirdParty</a> based on spoiler effect. In NY where <a href="https://tech.lgbt/tags/FusionVoting" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FusionVoting</a> is available: 4.3 M voted for Harris on DEM line 277K more voted for Harris on WOR line 46K voted for Jill Stein (write in) 4.6M total votes for HarrisLessons learned: WorkingFamilies is a third party gathering its own members and adding support to DEM's coalition Green party did not qualify for the ballot, and even with write-in they had a spoiler effect equal to 0.56% of the votes cast.You may conclude that <a href="https://mastodon.social/@WorkingFamilies" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@WorkingFamilies</a> is a hard-working member of the Progressive Coalition, and that Green party is a spoiler and a grift. There is a way to do third parties correctly and <a href="https://tech.lgbt/tags/WFP" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#WFP</a> is doing it, and <a href="https://tech.lgbt/tags/Green" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#Green</a> is not doing the work and causing harm to Progressive causes.Not in NY or CT? Ask your STATE Reps why <a href="https://tech.lgbt/tags/FusionVoting" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FusionVoting</a> is not allowed in your state!

NekodojoInteresting background on <a href="https://tech.lgbt/tags/FusionVoting" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FusionVoting</a> here. <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Fusion_voting" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://ballotpedia.org/Fusion_voting</a> "Fusion Voting" allows third parties to back the same candidate as the dominant party, while still being counted as votes for the third party's platform and agenda.

Nekodojo<a href="https://mastodon.social/@indivisibleteam" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@indivisibleteam</a> Democrats are lost and drifting right now and I’m glad there are groups like Indivisible and folks like Ezra and Leah out there. I can’t help but think, we can’t leave everything to the Democrats. I wish we could bring back <a href="https://tech.lgbt/tags/FusionVoting" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FusionVoting</a> and make a true Progressive coalition. I want more <a href="https://tech.lgbt/tags/ThirdParty" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#ThirdParty</a> options like WFP <a href="https://mastodon.social/@WorkingFamilies" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@WorkingFamilies</a> - they seem to be doing third party the right way and not being spoilers for Democrats. Maybe building a better coalition starts with building a better opposition! Let’s put GOP out of a job.

Cory DoctorowBut there doesn't seem to be any way to fix it. For one thing, the two parties are in charge of any reform, and they're in no hurry to put themselves out of business. It's effectively impossible for a third party to gain any serious power in the USA, and that's by design. After the leftist <a href="https://mamot.fr/tags/Populists" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#Populists</a> party came within a spitting distance of power in the 1890s, the Dems and Repubs got together and cooked the system, banning <a href="https://mamot.fr/tags/FusionVoting" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FusionVoting</a> and erecting other structural barriers.2/

swtyndall.notwhatwethinkGood follow on to previous post about why GOP wins elections even though their policies are not popular with most voters. This makes the case that we need to change our political system and voting laws to get rid of the lock that the 2 party system has on our elections. It also talks about how New Jersey is trying to do that, in spite of opposition for democrats and republicans, by adopting Fusion Voting. Well worth reading!!!(10) The Paradoxical Reason Republicans Win Elections Despite Unpopular Policies <a href="https://leedrutman.substack.com/p/the-paradoxical-reason-republicans" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://leedrutman.substack.com/p/the-paradoxical-reason-republicans</a>?<a href="https://climatejustice.social/tags/Politics" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#Politics</a> <a href="https://climatejustice.social/tags/Polarization" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#Polarization</a> <a href="https://climatejustice.social/tags/FusionVoting" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#FusionVoting</a> "How do we break the paradox? Un-bundle! More parties. To keep “on brand”, this is where I will point out that this is only possible through binary bundling. Binary bundling follows from the “compound majority” aspects of two-party voting. In a two-party system, there can only be two bundles. But the more parties, the more possible bundles. If we had, say, six parties, different parties could come up with different issue position bundles and priorities. Voters would not face the same trade-offs. Majorities could be more complex, and more fluid.This would be a more representative system. The forced-choice binary is artificial and dangerous. Even on the four issues discussed above, most voters hold some mix of Republican or Democratic positions.This might help Republicans win some elections, but it doesn’t help Republican voters, who often disagree with their party on major issues. If voters had more options, many could vote for a party that better represented their values and fought for them in making policy. Then representatives could bargain to work our reasonable compromises with majority support. So, how might we get more parties? Well, let’s take a quick visit to New Jersey, where a potentially ground-shifting court case is proceeding apace.Fusion voting gains support in Jersey Will the Garden State be the garden of democracy reform? I’ve been closely watching developments in New Jersey — in particular a case moving through the state Supreme Court, which would re-legalize fusion voting.4 So I was delighted to read a recent opinion piece in the Newark Star Ledger by Christine Todd Whitman and Robert Torricelli. (Whitman as in former Republican Governor Whitman. Torricelli as in former Democratic Senator Torricelli)As they write…“Sometime in the next several months, the New Jersey Supreme Court will likely decide a monumentally important case – Moderate Party v. New Jersey Division of Elections – that has the potential to reshape and improve politics in America. Indeed it has the potential to break this cycle of hyper-partisan polarization, a cycle that fills most Americans with despair. Let us explain….The answer is not, as some imagine, to try to get rid of parties or partisanship. Competent political parties serve a crucial function in politics because they give voters clear ways to express their values; we don’t want to destroy them, we want to change the incentives that drive their behavior. Parties can be a source of stability, strength and even innovation in our democracy.One way to do that — and this may strike readers as counter-intuitive — is to open the two-party system to more competition by reviving and re-legalizing “fusion” voting. Fusion voting means that a candidate can be nominated by more than one party, and voters then choose not just the candidate they prefer but also the party that is closest to their values. Under the current rules, established a century ago in almost all states, the two parties have a functional monopoly on power. Third parties are permitted to form, but the rules against cross-nominating a major party candidate keep them stuck in the “wasted vote” or “spoiler” box…….The systemic benefits of fusion could be substantial, by tempering the destabilizing effects of hyper-polarization and by incentivizing parties and candidates to compete for voters in the middle. But legalizing fusion would also empower the individual voter, especially one frustrated with our two major parties. A vote for a candidate on a centrist party’s line would be a powerful and effective way to signal that you favor problem-solving over posturing and to reward politicians who are workhorses instead of grandstanders.Bringing back fusion would strengthen the center of American politics. Otherwise, we’re trapped in a badly-designed game that is now driving our country toward a cliff."

Recent searches

Search options

Administered by:

Server stats:

#fusionvoting