A political 2022 Referendum

[mark46]

OPTION ONE - VOTE REPUBLICAN
Nothing wrong happened on January 6th. There was no attack on the Capitol which endangered law makers. Trump won the election by a huge majority; only great fraud caused everyone to believe other wise.

OPTION TWO - VOTE DEMOCRATIC
There was terrible assault on the Capitol on January 6th by those who believed the President and supported the great lie of great voter fraud.
=====================
The short of it is: vote for or against Trump and his statements regarding the 2020 election.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I choose option three.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

There is a third option. Don't vote. In the end, will voting Republican change anything?

 

[Hans Blaster]

There is a third option. Don't vote. In the end, will voting Republican change anything?

No it won't. I would avoid it then.

 

[hedrick]

If Trump tries to become Speaker, 2022 becomes a different ballgame. But there's still a lot of time. I don't think we can predict what politics will be then.

 

[chevyontheriver]

There is a third option. Don't vote. In the end, will voting Republican change anything?

There are more choices than Democrat, Republican, or not voting.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

There are more choices than Democrat, Republican, or not voting.

Like this?

 

[Occams Barber]

There are more choices than Democrat, Republican, or not voting.

My understanding is that Independents are rare birds in the US government.

Is there a realistic 4th option?

OB

 

[Occams Barber]

If Trump tries to become Speaker, 2022 becomes a different ballgame. But there's still a lot of time. I don't think we can predict what politics will be then.

I doubt that Trump has the personality or the political acumen to be Speaker.

OB

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I don't think it's quite as cut and try as the two options you have listed above.

If that one particular issue you're referencing was the only issue in US political discourse, and all other things were equal, then I'd agree with you.

But there's other issues at play for people...

For instance, if there were a debate about the fact that PETA sponsors people that firebomb medical research facilities and are okay with throwing buckets of fake blood on people wearing a fur coat, and the ASPCA doesn't like those things, but apart from that, the rest of their messages are very similar. Then it'd be easy, picking between those two organizations would be a referendum on whether or not you support arson and assault.


However, if it were a case where you were asking someone to choose between PETA and the Texas Trophy Hunters Association, it wouldn't be fair to say "this vote is a referendum on whether or not you think it's okay to firebomb a medical testing facility and throw fake blood on people" (as a way to castigate PETA), because then you're basically setting up the expectation that people who abhor animal cruelty should have to vote for a pro Trophy Hunting organization in order to "prove that they don't support firebombing medical facilities".


That's basically how your statement above is framed...you're expecting pro-life, pro traditional marriage, anti-marijuana, anti universal healthcare, etc... (all viewpoints I disagree with btw, I'm liberal on all of those things ...just stating it as as a point of reference) to vote democratic in order to "prove that they didn't support the insurrection".

That'd like a republican telling democrats that they had to vote GOP if they wanted to prove they don't support Antifa.

 

[chevyontheriver]

My understanding is that Independents are rare birds in the US government.

Is there a realistic 4th option?

OB

Independents are rare birds because Democrats push how the only way to vote against Republicans is to vote for a Democrat. And Republicans push how the only way to vote against a Democrat is to vote Republican. And since most people are voting against someone it's either Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum.

I try to get people out of that trap, but politics in America is really the politics of hating the other clan. It isn't about voting for a good candidate.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Like this?

About like that. Yup.

We get the Democrat or the Republican. We get a bad candidate or a worse one. The one guy who decided to vote for a third party may have been THE ONLY ONE who voted for a decent candidate. Does that make his vote wasted when one of the bad candidates won? Nope. In your scenario 159,999 people voted for bad candidates directly resulting in a bad candidate winning. It's on them for failing to elect someone better. Not the poor guy who cast a good vote for a losing candidate.

 

[mark46]

About like that. Yup.

We get the Democrat or the Republican. We get a bad candidate or a worse one. The one guy who decided to vote for a third party may have been THE ONLY ONE who voted for a decent candidate. Does that make his vote wasted when one of the bad candidates won? Nope. In your scenario 159,999 people voted for bad candidates directly resulting in a bad candidate winning. It's on them for failing to elect someone better. Not the poor guy who cast a good vote for a losing candidate.

A vote for a 3rd party certainly can have consequences in presidential races. Bush Sr would have a second term without Perot. Gore would be president if the Greens didn't run in NH.

But, yes, a vote for a 3rd Party is a vote against one of the major parties. Often, one of them will gain much more than the other.

 

[chevyontheriver]

A vote for a 3rd party certainly can have consequences in presidential races. Bush Sr would have a second term without Perot. Gore would be president if the Greens didn't run in NH.

But, yes, a vote for a 3rd Party is a vote against one of the major parties. Often, one of them will gain much more than the other.

And I say that we all need to start voting for better candidates. Trump vs Hillary was a race to the bottom. So was Biden vs Trump. If the parties give us such bad candidates we should not reward them by electing such bad candidates. It's delusional to do so. And we get the government we deserve.

 

[SimplyMe]

Independents are rare birds because Democrats push how the only way to vote against Republicans is to vote for a Democrat. And Republicans push how the only way to vote against a Democrat is to vote Republican. And since most people are voting against someone it's either Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum.

I try to get people out of that trap, but politics in America is really the politics of hating the other clan. It isn't about voting for a good candidate.

This is overly simplistic. For example, too often the third party choice is no better than the Democrat or Republican. For example, sometimes the Independent candidates are the "extremist" candidate, someone further left than Democrats (Green party, socialist) or farther right than Republicans (Constitution party). Additionally, even when voting for a Congressional candidate, if a third party candidate should win, they typically -- so that they have some power in Congress -- will "join" (caucus) with either the Republicans or Democrats in exchange for getting a committee assignment and position in that committee. In exchange, they'll end up having to basically vote the will of the party they caucus with.

The issue in the US, the more success a third party has, the more it weakens the party whose beliefs it is most similar to. For example, if the Green Party because successful it would weaken the Democrats, as they'd get less members of Congress and likely have no real chance at winning a Presidential Election. Yes, if the Democrats and Greens worked together in Congress, they would have more power, but it would largely be to blunt the work of the Republican President -- and the Republican President would likely do all he could do to support ideas and issues that drive a divide between the Greens and the Democrats.

For a third party to really be successful in the US, you'd likely need to change the Constitution, as third parties under the US system tends to weaken and steal the support from the party that is has the most similar beliefs, keeping either party from being a "majority" party.

 

[mark46]

And I say that we all need to start voting for better candidates. Trump vs Hillary was a race to the bottom. So was Biden vs Trump. If the parties give us such bad candidates we should not reward them by electing such bad candidates. It's delusional to do so. And we get the government we deserve.

The parties no longer "give us" candidates. We have the most drawn out election process in the world. The real fights are often in the primaries, where real decisions are made. This is true at the local level, at the state level, and at the federal level. There are plenty of candidates in the primaries.

Sure, the choices are limited in November. But, we shouldn't make believe that we didn't have a "real" choice because there are only 2 candidates with a chance in November. Many, many Americans had opportunities long before November.

 

[SimplyMe]

The parties no longer "give us" candidates. We have the most drawn out election process in the world. The real fights are often in the primaries, where real decisions are made. This is true at the local level, at the state level, and at the federal level. There are plenty of candidates in the primaries.

Sure, the choices are limited in November. But, we shouldn't make believe that we didn't have a "real" choice because there are only 2 candidates with a chance in November. Many, many Americans had opportunities long before November.

Yes, this is one of the major issues. While I admit, the parties do exert a certain amount of control of the primaries; the fact remains that too many people ignore the primaries, then complain about the candidates in November.

Having said that, our election season runs far too long. I'd much prefer a national primary day -- particularly for Presidential nominations, rather than string out the vote over half a year. While it might condense it too much, it seems like having the primaries in September (so that it isn't "diluted" by summer vacations), followed by the national election a month to six weeks later would avoid much of the election "fatigue" so many Americans feel, while still giving enough time to research the candidates.

 

[hislegacy]

I vote ABD

Anyone
But a
Democratic

 

[chevyontheriver]

This is overly simplistic. For example, too often the third party choice is no better than the Democrat or Republican. For example, sometimes the Independent candidates are the "extremist" candidate, someone further left than Democrats (Green party, socialist) or farther right than Republicans (Constitution party). Additionally, even when voting for a Congressional candidate, if a third party candidate should win, they typically -- so that they have some power in Congress -- will "join" (caucus) with either the Republicans or Democrats in exchange for getting a committee assignment and position in that committee. In exchange, they'll end up having to basically vote the will of the party they caucus with.

The issue in the US, the more success a third party has, the more it weakens the party whose beliefs it is most similar to. For example, if the Green Party because successful it would weaken the Democrats, as they'd get less members of Congress and likely have no real chance at winning a Presidential Election. Yes, if the Democrats and Greens worked together in Congress, they would have more power, but it would largely be to blunt the work of the Republican President -- and the Republican President would likely do all he could do to support ideas and issues that drive a divide between the Greens and the Democrats.

For a third party to really be successful in the US, you'd likely need to change the Constitution, as third parties under the US system tends to weaken and steal the support from the party that is has the most similar beliefs, keeping either party from being a "majority" party.

The parties have as much power as we give them. Both big parties are not serving us well yet we continue to empower them. Time for both of them to fade away.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I vote ABD

Anyone
But a
Democratic

But in doing so did you feel compelled to vote for Trump?