General Discussion

saras

(6,670 posts)

67. Anyone supporting the spoiler effect is supporting, directly, the Repub's destruction of America

Wed Dec 21, 2011, 12:43 PM

Dec 2011

The two-party, winner-take-all, spoiler-infested system we have now is a miserable failure. If the Tea Party runs the Repubs into the ground, I could see them disappearing permanently as a party, the Democrats taking the conservative position, and a Progressive or Green party taking the place of the liberal Democrats.

But as long as the anti-democratic two-party stuff is wired into our system, we will continue to have Republicrats and Demublicans instead of legitimate choices.

But the first step is to fix the GODDAMNED spoiler effect. There is NO EXCUSE WHATSOEVER in a nominal democracy that voting for a candidate should put the candidate with the most opposing views into office. No excuse at all. And I'm really sick and tired of nominal Democrats defending it as though it was anything other than corrupt.

It may be what's happening, but when you're being raped, a rape is what's happening. The only acceptance needed is the acceptance that THIS knife in THIS man's back will end THIS rape right now.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

114 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Should there be, could there be a Progressive Party in the near future? [View all] Burgman Dec 2011 OP

No, no, and fuck no. TheWraith Dec 2011 #1

Wraith, Great Post Frances Dec 2011 #3

I agree. Starting a party at the national level is a wrong move. bluestate10 Dec 2011 #16

My initial reaction was Yes! Thinking along the lines gateley Dec 2011 #66

Actually, I remember when a lot of Democrats were like George Wallace. Democrats weren't WheelWalker Dec 2011 #100

Yeah, Biden mentioned that in his Esquire piece a week or so ago -- that the Dems used gateley Dec 2011 #109

Exactly, push the party Left through elections and public demand. FarLeftFist Dec 2011 #21

No. But Progressive Dems should make themselves known by some preface like "Progressive"-Democrats. glinda Dec 2011 #37

Exactly - but that isn't the point of posts like the OP. BlueMTexpat Dec 2011 #85

How exactly does the OP confuse people? nm rhett o rick Dec 2011 #86

They may think that voting for some so-called third-party progressive at the national level works. BlueMTexpat Dec 2011 #88

Many on the left see that they are being blackmailed into supporting a party that doesnt rhett o rick Dec 2011 #92

I'm not sure why you feel that you are being "blackmailed." BlueMTexpat Dec 2011 #96

It is not hysterical. Instead of trying to win over the progressives with issues rhett o rick Dec 2011 #106

Thanks ... and hang in there! BlueMTexpat Dec 2011 #113

+1 ut oh Dec 2011 #102

Help us elect the most progressive Democrat to come along BlueToTheBone Dec 2011 #111

While *we* got "Nader-ed" in 2000, *they* got "Perot-ed" in 1992. nt LaydeeBug Dec 2011 #6

So, we are stuck with Republican and DINO (Republican Lite) then? RC Dec 2011 #9

If you have a Republican Rep or Senator in your district, work to get Old and In the Way Dec 2011 #36

The BIGGEST roadblock to getting Progressive Senators elected IS the White House. bvar22 Dec 2011 #72

no...you and this article are wrong Sheepshank Dec 2011 #77

I was THERE. I SAW it in the Arkansas Democratic Primary 2010. bvar22 Dec 2011 #78

bvar is right. The WH has not supported progressives. If you dont agree show rhett o rick Dec 2011 #87

In point of fact, you are wrong, and not the other poster. DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2011 #91

WH does not dictate my personal choice... Sheepshank Dec 2011 #112

You said it very well. But we must take back the Democratic Party. rhett o rick Dec 2011 #90

As stated upthread, we need to build locally. It's not all or nothing. We can gateley Dec 2011 #68

I think you have captured the essence of the situation quite nicely. Old and In the Way Dec 2011 #10

Like there's some deep significance to starting at the top eridani Dec 2011 #33

Just a nudge to support Inslee for Gov (and I'm sure you didn't really gateley Dec 2011 #70

Absolutely! eridani Dec 2011 #79

Couldn't have said it better. -nt CakeGrrl Dec 2011 #14

A third party candidacy helped bill clinton get elected. nt boston bean Dec 2011 #40

You might have a hard time proving that zipplewrath Dec 2011 #50

Well then, you better pay more heed to the progressives in your own party fascisthunter Dec 2011 #51

We Liberals/Progressives should heed the advice of Barry Goldwater amb123 Dec 2011 #56

Did you forget about Ross Perot and a Democrat winning that election? Bandit Dec 2011 #60

You are correct. The only way to do this is the way the Tbaggers took over the rethug party. We jwirr Dec 2011 #64

Thank You. So glad that is the first post under this trash OP. Raffi Ella Dec 2011 #75

There was one in the past. The Bull Moose Party. Teddy Roosevelt's progressive party. FarLeftFist Dec 2011 #2

I thought Bull Moose was Theo. Hmmmm, Thanks for that. :) LaydeeBug Dec 2011 #4

Edited. FarLeftFist Dec 2011 #7

And who was elected President when Roosevelt ran on the Bull Moose Party ticket? Frances Dec 2011 #5

Teddy Roosevelt was originally a Republican Zalatix Dec 2011 #8

Yep. Teddy set the bar for Progressivism. FarLeftFist Dec 2011 #19

I would love to have more choices quinnox Dec 2011 #11

They'd have to work together treestar Dec 2011 #15

Clegg in Britain is a perfect example. bluestate10 Dec 2011 #22

I don't mind "compromise". bvar22 Dec 2011 #101

There are already more choices, at least in New York. A Simple Game Dec 2011 #103

A third party stands exactly zero chance in this current system. liberal N proud Dec 2011 #12

Don't agree that they are "all bought and paid for." treestar Dec 2011 #13

I think I kind of adressed that in the OP. Burgman Dec 2011 #17

No reason to panic treestar Dec 2011 #18

You "think". LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #24

Yes, I think, I reason, I deduce Burgman Dec 2011 #25

Is that so? DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2011 #94

I would assume it's better for him that people be convinced of what he's saying. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #95

I was addressing the tone you used with that poster, and not the poster's words. You know this. DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2011 #97

And? LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #98

So? And? DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2011 #99

0-6 with explicit jury nullification of third-party rules. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #31

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.Were you "Juried?" Burgman Dec 2011 #35

Yes, that is exactly what he's saying. City Lights Dec 2011 #61

mind telling us why you posted this? fascisthunter Dec 2011 #52

Mind telling me why you're asking. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #58

Are you trying to be obnoxious? Burgman Dec 2011 #73

I don't care if you're a life-long Democrat. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #74

When this country is reduced to a smoldering ruin, wrap yourself in your party pride... dorksied Dec 2011 #80

Most people here on DU don't appear to help fund campaigns. bluestate10 Dec 2011 #20

Hmmmm, you do have a point there. n/t Zalatix Dec 2011 #30

In fact with the internet and the ability to spread out the message on an easier platform treestar Dec 2011 #44

No. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #23

"Anyways?" Burgman Dec 2011 #26

You won't convince anyone with these snarky replies. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #27

Yes, I am most likely incomptent. I may be snarky at times. Burgman Dec 2011 #29

The influence might make some more people by applying a little leverage. TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #89

Not without a different voting system bhikkhu Dec 2011 #28

What do you think a "progressive"platform would be? Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #32

Sort of like what the Dems already have eridani Dec 2011 #34

Unfortunately they don't seem to ignore it so much as they actively work against it. nt stillwaiting Dec 2011 #41

The progressive caucus is the largest caucus in congress. joshcryer Dec 2011 #83

Yes. We can't expect change at the presidential level unless we do that. n/t eridani Dec 2011 #114

Wouldn't matter surfdog Dec 2011 #38

We already have one....but I won't mention it here :) AnOhioan Dec 2011 #39

Isn't there already an American party by that Name? DeathToTheOil Dec 2011 #42

Our only hope for our lifetime is to either get the money out, mmonk Dec 2011 #43

No, however quaker bill Dec 2011 #45

I would love that because that would make it easier socialist_n_TN Dec 2011 #110

The last time a new major party emerged and stayed was in the 1850's as the country teetered on the Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #46

There should be a number of parties to choose from Marrah_G Dec 2011 #47

I feel that the more power Democrats get, the more they act like Republicans Ferret Annica Dec 2011 #48

If there isn't, or if the Democratic Party doesn't become it, there will be no electoral solution. rug Dec 2011 #49

A party that is not over-run with corporatists, would be nice. comipinko Dec 2011 #53

Yes Absolutely Mosaic Dec 2011 #54

Anyone may start up any political party he or she wishes. MineralMan Dec 2011 #55

It is possible, and I for one would welcome it. nt NorthCarolina Dec 2011 #57

Whether there should be or not, really isn't going to matter, there will be.... Bandit Dec 2011 #59

You want a progressive party start from the ground and work up with the Democratic party LynneSin Dec 2011 #62

There must be tavalon Dec 2011 #63

Yes. Democracy is about the people having choices. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #65

Anyone supporting the spoiler effect is supporting, directly, the Repub's destruction of America saras Dec 2011 #67

No. MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #69

Should a radical mass socialist political party be supported by those who want to change the system? Better Believe It Dec 2011 #71

Personally...I think it would be as effective and popular as TEA group. Sheepshank Dec 2011 #76

I predict that once the Republican party implodes, it if doesn't adapt... joshcryer Dec 2011 #81

What's the potential for the Democratic Party becoming progressive? K&R (nt) T S Justly Dec 2011 #82

It is silly to equate the Democrats and Republicans karynnj Dec 2011 #84

Only with INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING Martin Eden Dec 2011 #93

Yes and no. Deep13 Dec 2011 #104

Everyone loses when there are only two choices. See, e.g. "lesser of 2 evils" argument. DirkGently Dec 2011 #105

Yes. We need to take the Democratic Party back to its liberal roots by Cleita Dec 2011 #107

There should be..... Hulk Dec 2011 #108