re: Truly don't understand how anyone can consider themselves an "Independent" at this point

quote:

---

O.k., but everyone says the "Two Party System" as though there is something about the electoral system that only allows two parties.

---

Only 2 parties have the ability to get the needed exposure for their candidates

Primaries
Televised debates

quote:

---

There's no "system" that makes it so.

Any time people wanted they could vote for a 3rd or a 4th or a 5th party, they just choose not to.

That's not a "system." That's just a cultural trend.

---

You’re half-right in the most literal, useless sense. Yes, nothing physically stops someone from voting third party. But saying “there’s no system” because ballots technically allow it is like saying gravity is just a “cultural trend” because you’re free to sit down.

The Constitution structurally incentivizes two major parties. Single-member districts plus first-past-the-post voting means whoever gets the most votes wins, even without a majority. That punishes vote splitting. If two ideologically similar groups divide their vote, the unified opposing group wins. So factions merge into two coalitions to avoid self-sabotage.

Google Duverger’s Law.

It’s the predictable outcome of winner-take-all rules. Parliamentary systems with proportional representation reward smaller parties because seats are allocated by percentage. Ours does not. Our system forces coalition building before the election, not after.

So no, America is not legally restricted to two parties. But institutionally, electorally, and mechanically, it functions as a two-party system because the structure makes third parties a whole bunch of 'not shite' at scale.

Calling that a “cultural trend” ignores the incentives baked directly into the architecture.

This isn’t a defense of political parties and it’s not an endorsement of joining one. It’s just a description of reality.

exactly

quote:

---

Remember, you got young kids out there that don't want to work.. They want food housing insurance at the taxpayer exspense. They have this utopian dream of surviving without working. And the Democrats promise them that.

---

The amount of them that want to be “a streamer” is disgusting.

quote:

---

You’re half-right in the most literal, useless sense.

---

You said it far better than I did.

Nah. Same ideas. My answer was too simple for you. Thankfully, he expounded on it.

There’s a lot of stupid in both parties that no one wants to associate themselves with. I’m a republican, but I sure as shite ain’t proud of sharing my party affiliation with a lot of the people in it. They give me enough reasons to be ashamed of it, but the left is simply too corrupt, too stupid, and too evil to concede any ground to.

quote:

---

One of the biggest problems we have.

---

Is it?

People say this, but from what I can tell, the alternative has significant downsides as well.

In a multi-party scenario you might have five or six parties each getting between 15% and 25% of the vote.

This apparently tends to radicalize parties toward the fringe and a party with no more than 20%-25% representation can become a kingmaker and dominate policy directions.

So the "White People Take Their Turn At The Bottom" party (not literally called that, but that would be the central plank) could theoretically drive policy under a multi-party system.

Does anybody here doubt that there is 25% of the electorate who would vote for a "White People Take Their Turn At The Bottom" Party? I don't. You're at almost 20% with just black voters and college student voters. That's without any liberal white women, who would undoubtedly pile on.

And that's for the Legislative branch. Imagine electing a POTUS that only 23% of the electorate voted for.

quote:

---

But both parties and the media are invested in propping up this bullshite.

---

As has been explained to me, it's neither the media nor the parties that are responsible for this. It's the Constitution and state laws.

I would never call myself an independent because that gives the impression that I may possibly agree with Democrat policy. While I do disagree with aand despise a few of the Republican politicians, I am a conservative and will call myself a Republican. Calling yourself an independent in today's political climate is like calling yourself bisexual but not gay.