It’s a Charlie Brown and the football situation. You can only fall for the same bait and switch so many times before you just give up. In a democracy it leads to voter apathy. And primaries are poorly run. If it isn’t a prominent one, you likely won’t find much information on the candidates prior to the primary election, and for the president, they sre pretty much decided by 4th one so if you’re state does a later primary, chances are that your preferred candidate has already dropped out by the time you can actually vote for them.
To my knowledge Americans have never given Democrats a chance, the Democrats haven’t had a majority capable of pushing a bill through without Republican participation since 2008 and Republicans have been remarkably consistent at pulling the party together to stonewall Democrats so they look ineffective.
I mean the Democrats are often ineffective but at least punish them for the failures they make on their own merits, like the recent agreement to reopen the government.
They had a majority in the House from 2006 to 2010 and from 2008 to 2014 in the Senate. It’s not like the GOP has been in power forever.
And again in the Senate from 2022 to 2024 and from 2018 to 2022 in the House.
There’s a reason why some people dont really believe in them
I was referring specifically to Senate, however it’s a long messy history, let me go on GovTrack.us and see if I can find the senate records to explain what I mean
Edit: there it is,
✓On the opening day of the One Hundred Seventeenth Congress, the U.S. Senate was comprised of 51 Republicans, 46 Democrats, 2 Independents (who caucused with the Democrats), and 1 vacancy. No candidate received a majority of votes in the general election for Georgia’s class 2 seat or in the special election for Georgia’s class 3 seat. Runoff elections for both of the state’s Senate seats were scheduled for January 5, 2021. Democratic candidates won both elections. Following the inauguration of Vice President Kamala D. Harris on January 20, 2021, the Senate had a Democratic majority, comprised of 50 Republicans, 48 Democrats, and 2 Independents (who caucus with the Democrats). The Vice President is able to cast tie-breaking votes in the Senate. See United States Senate, “Party Division,” https://www.senate.gov/history/partydiv.htm.
Office of the Historian: history@mail.house.gov
Office of Art & Archives, Office of the Clerk: art@mail.house.gov, archives@mail.house.gov
The below information is a tie which effectively allowed for stonewalling. Yes if all Democratic senators, 2 independents and the vice president voted together they could push things through. However the fact of the matter is they don’t tow the party line like Republicans and vote more independently. Perhaps a party failure but I see that as a tenant of a functioning democracy.
You could make the argument against an enemy willing to use those tactics not using them Is a failure to the people but I’d argue the smarter thing as individuals would be to blame Republicans and vote them out of positions of power.
And before that the last time they had a majority was 2009 to 2011
Yes of course I am not personally sympathic to GOP but at least they seem to be giving their voters want they want on their key issues. Do D do this?
If you want people to want to vote for you need to give the impression, even falsely, that you will deliver and the democrats seem to have lost the ability to do that.
Agreed but it’s much easier to give voters what they want when you spend billions on propaganda either directly or indirectly through Russian state actors. More like they acted in their own interest and dreamed up a narrative to convince the common man it was there’s too. Now, no doubt they’re effective political tools, hats off to them but it’s a lot easier to align men with their own greed than a common path forward for society.
A big part of the problem is the length of the “primary season” and spreading out votes over the course of several months.
This makes it really hard to sustain a budget, especially for grassroots candidates…but also sets up frontrunners in a big way.
IMO primaries would have a different outcome if they were all held on one day and we limited primary campaign season to like 3 months tops.
I’d say something about superdelegates but the fact is that parties and primaries aren’t really a part of the process. People treat the GOP and DNC like they are official government branches when really they are just more like a private club. They let us have a primary. If the bylaws say they can override the primary, that’s the bylaws. If people disagree with it, then either the bylaws get changed or a new club gets founded.
The problem, then, is that our voting system ultimately necessitates no more than two major parties. Since the winner is the one with the most votes*, it’s very easy for two parties that align on many fronts to actively work against each other…see Ralph Nader in Florida in 2000. And it takes a huge shift to uproot an established party.
It’s a Charlie Brown and the football situation. You can only fall for the same bait and switch so many times before you just give up. In a democracy it leads to voter apathy. And primaries are poorly run. If it isn’t a prominent one, you likely won’t find much information on the candidates prior to the primary election, and for the president, they sre pretty much decided by 4th one so if you’re state does a later primary, chances are that your preferred candidate has already dropped out by the time you can actually vote for them.
To my knowledge Americans have never given Democrats a chance, the Democrats haven’t had a majority capable of pushing a bill through without Republican participation since 2008 and Republicans have been remarkably consistent at pulling the party together to stonewall Democrats so they look ineffective.
I mean the Democrats are often ineffective but at least punish them for the failures they make on their own merits, like the recent agreement to reopen the government.
They had a majority in the House from 2006 to 2010 and from 2008 to 2014 in the Senate. It’s not like the GOP has been in power forever. And again in the Senate from 2022 to 2024 and from 2018 to 2022 in the House.
There’s a reason why some people dont really believe in them
I was referring specifically to Senate, however it’s a long messy history, let me go on GovTrack.us and see if I can find the senate records to explain what I mean
Edit: there it is,
The below information is a tie which effectively allowed for stonewalling. Yes if all Democratic senators, 2 independents and the vice president voted together they could push things through. However the fact of the matter is they don’t tow the party line like Republicans and vote more independently. Perhaps a party failure but I see that as a tenant of a functioning democracy.
You could make the argument against an enemy willing to use those tactics not using them Is a failure to the people but I’d argue the smarter thing as individuals would be to blame Republicans and vote them out of positions of power.
And before that the last time they had a majority was 2009 to 2011
Yes of course I am not personally sympathic to GOP but at least they seem to be giving their voters want they want on their key issues. Do D do this? If you want people to want to vote for you need to give the impression, even falsely, that you will deliver and the democrats seem to have lost the ability to do that.
Agreed but it’s much easier to give voters what they want when you spend billions on propaganda either directly or indirectly through Russian state actors. More like they acted in their own interest and dreamed up a narrative to convince the common man it was there’s too. Now, no doubt they’re effective political tools, hats off to them but it’s a lot easier to align men with their own greed than a common path forward for society.
A big part of the problem is the length of the “primary season” and spreading out votes over the course of several months.
This makes it really hard to sustain a budget, especially for grassroots candidates…but also sets up frontrunners in a big way.
IMO primaries would have a different outcome if they were all held on one day and we limited primary campaign season to like 3 months tops.
I’d say something about superdelegates but the fact is that parties and primaries aren’t really a part of the process. People treat the GOP and DNC like they are official government branches when really they are just more like a private club. They let us have a primary. If the bylaws say they can override the primary, that’s the bylaws. If people disagree with it, then either the bylaws get changed or a new club gets founded.
The problem, then, is that our voting system ultimately necessitates no more than two major parties. Since the winner is the one with the most votes*, it’s very easy for two parties that align on many fronts to actively work against each other…see Ralph Nader in Florida in 2000. And it takes a huge shift to uproot an established party.