Is a moderate party viable?

[jayem]

The same can be said of direct election (of the president) or of a proportional election system such as has been described.

Not when candidates are elected directly by the voters. Every vote counts. But when middlemen elect a candidate, your vote may be completely ignored. You know what I'm talking about.

 

[Albion]

Not when candidates are elected directly by the voters. Every vote counts. But when middlemen elect a candidate, your vote may be completely ignored. You know what I'm talking about.

Part of the problem is that there are too many issues involved with any such change. It is not as though direct election would take care of every grievance people have with the current system. For example, it would do nothing to give a fairer chance to third parties, yet I think that is where this debate started.

 

[jayem]

Part of the problem is that there are too many issues involved with any such change. It is not as though direct election would take care of every grievance people have with the current system. For example, it would do nothing to give a fairer chance to third parties, yet I think that is where this debate started.

I agree with you. There are 2 factors that would make 3rd parties competitive:

1) Money. By far the most important. Without money, you can't get your message out. Dems and Repubs have the fund raising apparatus and the large donors and superpacs (dark money) that spend big sums on behalf of their candidates and issues. Unless there is monumental reform in campaign financing (i.e., abrogating Citizens United) it's highly unlikely any 3rd party will have the resources to take on the 2 major parties.

2) Ballot access. Getting your candidate on the ballot requies navigating 50 different state requirement. Like signed petitions, and having won various percentages of the votes in previous elections. Rules which were enacted by major party legislators in order to maintain their dominance in elections.

If you can think of a way around thsese obstacles, I'm all ears.

 

[Percivale]

I agree with you. There are 2 factors that would make 3rd parties competitive:

1) Money. By far the most important. Without money, you can't get your message out. Dems and Repubs have the fund raising apparatus and the large donors and superpacs (dark money) that spend big sums on behalf of their candidates and issues. Unless there is monumental reform in campaign financing (i.e., abrogating Citizens United) it's highly unlikely any 3rd party will have the resources to take on the 2 major parties.

2) Ballot access. Getting your candidate on the ballot requies navigating 50 different state requirement. Like signed petitions, and having won various percentages of the votes in previous elections. Rules which were enacted by major party legislators in order to maintain their dominance in elections.

If you can think of a way around thsese obstacles, I'm all ears.

A third factor, which I think is the most important one, that would help third parties is a change to the voting system to use approval voting or other range voting, Ranked choice/transferable vote, or, which would be most effective, proportional multimember districts for Congress.

 

[Dave Ellis]

would a centrist or moderate party work, or is that not a coherent enough ideology to rally support?

You already have a centrist party, they're called the Democrats.

At least they'd be centrist or even centre-right in most other first world countries.

 

[Percivale]

You already have a centrist party, they're called the Democrats.

At least they'd be centrist or even centre-right in most other first world countries.

Centrism can only be defined by its position in the nation at the current time, its a constantly moving mark on policy questions, though its philosophy is more constant. I do believe there are a lot of moderates in the Democratic Party, though the more radical progressives get more attention.

 

[Radagast]

would a centrist or moderate party work

That's exactly what Trump is, in that Trump's platform combines some traditionally Democrat ideas and some traditionally Republican ones. For that reason, Trump has the backing of many blue-collar union workers who were once Democrats.

One possible future is that Trump's legacy becomes a centrist party that includes blue-collar union workers and some Democrat ideas (like expanded healthcare), but excludes some Republicans.

Another possible future is that the Democrats abandon their leftward shift, and re-embrace their traditional base.

 

[Percivale]

That's exactly what Trump is, in that Trump's platform combines some traditionally Democrat ideas and some traditionally Republican ones. For that reason, Trump has the backing of many blue-collar union workers who were once Democrats.

One possible future is that Trump's legacy becomes a centrist party that includes blue-collar union workers and some Democrat ideas (like expanded healthcare), but excludes some Republicans.

Another possible future is that the Democrats abandon their leftward shift, and re-embrace their traditional base.

So far it seems Trump is staying pretty close to the Right. Tariffs are the only thing I can think of that he supports that the Left does, but even that is more of a populist and pro small business issue than a left or right one. I wonder if his priorities will change with Democrats controlling the House. What areas do you see Democrats moving left the most on?

 

[DidYouSaySomething]

Billionaire Ross Perot ran for president in 1992 against George H W Bush and Bill Clinton as an Independent. Perot was preaching the government should balance the budget instead of increase the national debt. Perot lost the election to Bill Clinton, but from 1998 -2001, President Clinton and Congress passed balanced budgets. The Federal government has owed money since 1835.

the neocons hated perot because he was anti war

 

[Harpuia]

Well it's been a minute or two (or like... four years) since I posted anything. But I thought I'd peek in, say hi, and put my thoughts on this.

I used to think a moderate party could be viable, and maybe at the early 2010s it might have been. I'm not so sure anymore. The few moderates I do know aren't really into politics anymore, like myself, at least not following it religiously anyway. Part of that is because the significantly more charged climate has drained them. And people have lives. And politics seems to all be about activism and outrage now and moderates aren't the best at either one. So is a party viable? Not one that can win elections I don't think. Didn't a few guys already try this anyway?