Gallup Polls has been asking the U.S. public starting in 2003 whether they believe the U.S. needs a new major political party. On September 25, new results were released. See this Gallup press release. The percentage of respondents replying “yes” is up to 60%. That is the highest ever, except once before it was at 60%.
What century before the Gallup Poll genius folks detect that the USA has had nonstop ANTI-Democracy minority rule robot party hack gerrymander regimes since 1776 — and esp. since 1865 ???
The SCOTUS hacks raised the minority rule percentages to about 30 percent in the 1964 gerrymander cases.
—-
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
Top Two will result in a third major party.
Pure proportional representation (PR) will give us ballot access and representation with fair thresholds across the board.
The 9th USA Parliament has been using PR for twenty consecutive years. We inspired the naming of Google and probably many other entities using ranking voting systems and unity.
http://www.usparliament.org/
“Top Two will result in a third major party.”
Just like getting rid of the US Constitution will help protect our constitutional liberties.
“Just like getting rid of the US Constitution will help protect our constitutional liberties.”
When there are three candidates, any candidate which garners 33.33% plus one vote, is guaranteed to win the primary and get their message heard as an either/or choice in the runoff election.
A lot of time and money has been spent on fighting Top Two that could have been spent working with a new way to get third parties recognition but that has been squandered by them.
Not true with the new United Coalition. We are eager and ready to use Top Two as it was meant to be used.
While plurality elections in general are unfair and primitive compared to pure proportional representation (PR), Top Two was approved by a majority of CA voters, is a mathematical improvement and small step forward for a third way.
Amweicans say that, yet they never make it happen.
*Americans
Under top-two, the November election is not a “runoff.” A “runoff” is only held when the election itself fails to elect anyone. But in the California and Washington systems for congress and partisan state office, the first round is not an election because it can’t elect anyone. It is just a trial run election that serves as a ballot access barrier to the election itself.
“Americans say that, yet they never make it happen.”
Mathematical problems caused by single-winner districts and plurality voting keep this from happening.
Fortunately with Top Two, we have a two-member district for the primary, which unifies all voters under equality and fairness.
Everyone loves Top Two, because one votes can make or break a third way, since the maximum threshold for winning is 33.33% (plus one vote) to break a three-way tie.
Should one voter switch to the third way, then the one vote can break the tie between the two largest civic groups.
Plus when there are more candidates, the maximum threshold gets randomly lowered with every new name on the ballot, and the split-vote problem might randomly elect someone into the top two with far lower threshold than 33.33% plus one vote.
In facet the United Coalition candidate Ron Gold for Attorney General won the Top Two California primary with 12.5% of the votes. Had he helped unite more voters there could have been support for the Unity, but dividers got the publicity and he didn’t promote the unity nor coordinate and synchronize enough with the team.
This is an untra-conservative voting system that doesn’t liberally throw away and waste votes in a three-way tie. Liberals like it too, because they can break the tie with just one vote.
We are building for the future. We may not succeed in 2015 because we are being blocked out because of the divisive nature of plurality elections.
So we can pay more attention to unifying voting systems in other areas such as corporate, union and international elections.
Check out the new “Artists Union” facebook page, yet another entity using advanced elections to unify the voters:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/all-party-system-co/artist-union-voting/418197448304869
In the popular imagination a third party are those tiny groups of people who typically get 1% or 2% of the vote or less. That is not a new major party. Who would organize a new major party? It would probably come from major organized groups within the existing major parties, such as organized labor, women’s and civil rights groups, organized religion and similar organizations and/or perhaps sections of the apparatus of existing parties such as county party committees and perhaps local clubs. The is simply no other institutional or organizational apparatus extant in the US with the capacity to organize such an effort.
More or less control freak STATISM ???
See the left/right Roman Republic Civil WARS from 120 B.C. to 27 B.C.
Thus – the nonstop Deja Vu esp since 1929 and Great Depression I — with now 2006-XXXX Great Depression II.
NEVER any shortage of left/right Demagogue FREAKS — who want TOTAL POWER. See Stalin and Hitler examples.
No one predicted the downfall of the Soviet Union in 1991. It just happened without anyone realizing it was about to happen.
Any predictions for —
The 1775-1776 American Revolution in 1760 with the new King George III ???
The 1861 Civil War in 1789 (obviously about slavery) [with the later 1820-1861 buildup of major pressure] ???
The incumbent MONSTERS allow super bad stuff to accumulate and then things HAPPEN.
During the Civil War there was a phrase — the *logic of events* — leading to the 13th – 14th – 15th Amdts (at the real cost of about 750,000 DEAD men on both sides).
—
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
The problem with using the statistic of 60% of Americans wanting a new major party is that some of those want a party to the left of the Democrats, some want a party to the right of the Republicans, some want a party in the center between the Democrats and Republicans, some want a party that doesn’t fit the left-right scale, and still others haven’t really thought about which of those they want.
So any party that wants to become the third major party is going to disappoint a lot of members of that 60%.
Americans could have a third major political party if they’d cast more votes for the existing third parties. After all, they count votes on election day, not dollars. Sadly, Americans are too stupid to ignore the ads & pundits and vote against the two corporate parties.
Joshua –
I could hug you for your post. Absolutely correct. It’s like job performance polls. Example: “Do you think Obama is doing a good job? Yes or No?” Well, if I’m a rock-ribbed conservative the answer would almost certainly be “No.” But I’m not. I live on the other end of the spectrum and yet my answer to the same question is the same as Grover Norquist’s would be…”No.” So what’s the point of the question?
Another problem – even if 60% of Americans said that they wanted to see a revival of the Nazi Party in America, or alternatively if 60% of Americans said they craved for the creation of a far left socialist party in this country, 100% of them would be disappointed in either event because without revolutionary changes in our system of campaign finance, no third party will ever be successful in this country. Ever. That’s…ever. Sorry to disappoint those who want an alternative to the “duopoly,” but until we all address the problem of how to regulate (yes, you Libertarian boys and girls, that’s REGULATE) campaign finance, you might just as well be crying out for a third alternative to being pregnant and not being pregnant. Ain’t gonna happen.
Anyone with one-tenth of a brain will realize that the question Gallup asked is idiotic and indicative of less than nothing. Anyone who believes it means anything other than voter disgust in 2015 is an idiot.