How are you feeling about the state of American democracy?

[downer]

Lose in a democratic election? The point is that they may be a thing of the past.

[marshwiggle]

Lose in a democratic election? The point is that they may be a thing of the past.

Aside from the hyperbole, this misses the point I was making:

According to Gallup, in 2021, percentages of American voters:

• Republican 31%
• Democrat 27%
• Independent 41%

For either party to win, they have to win a majority of independents. If they lose, it's because they didn't appeal to enough independents. APPEALING TO MODERATES IS THE WAY FORWARD FOR EVERYONE. Catering to the extremists on either end is not a winning strategy.

Moving to the centre makes it much easier for a party to win by enough votes to avoid all kinds of whining from the other side. Contested elections are the result of parties catering more to their fringes than to the mainstream voters.

[mahagonny]

Lose in a democratic election? The point is that they may be a thing of the past.

Aside from the hyperbole, this misses the point I was making:

According to Gallup, in 2021, percentages of American voters:

• Republican 31%
• Democrat 27%
• Independent 41%

For either party to win, they have to win a majority of independents. If they lose, it's because they didn't appeal to enough independents. APPEALING TO MODERATES IS THE WAY FORWARD FOR EVERYONE. Catering to the extremists on either end is not a winning strategy.

Moving to the centre makes it much easier for a party to win by enough votes to avoid all kinds of whining from the other side. Contested elections are the result of parties catering more to their fringes than to the mainstream voters.

Don't you usually win an election by using the plan that appears most likely to work? We don't care that much how loud they whine, long as they lose.

[waterboy]

Except that certain "extremists" won't accept the result of a fair election if the independents don't vote their way.

[marshwiggle]

Except that certain "extremists" won't accept the result of a fair election if the independents don't vote their way.

And by definition, there are many fewer of them. The bigger the majority of voters who accept the outcome, the less the whining of a lunatic fringe matters.

TWITTER IS NOT REALITY. Despite how many people who should know better, including journalists, act as though it is.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Conservatives in this thread need to get a grip on reality. Republicans literally tried to overturn the results of a free and fair national election.

According to Gallup, in 2021, percentages of American voters:

• Republican 31%
• Democrat 27%
• Independent 41%

For either party to win, they have to win a majority of independents. If they lose, it's because they didn't appeal to enough independents. APPEALING TO MODERATES IS THE WAY FORWARD FOR EVERYONE. Catering to the extremists on either end is not a winning strategy.

Ok? What does this have to do with the my post?

I'm sure we agree that appealing to moderates is a smart political strategy in general elections, but that is not the issue here.

[marshwiggle]

Conservatives in this thread need to get a grip on reality. Republicans literally tried to overturn the results of a free and fair national election.

According to Gallup, in 2021, percentages of American voters:

• Republican 31%
• Democrat 27%
• Independent 41%

For either party to win, they have to win a majority of independents. If they lose, it's because they didn't appeal to enough independents. APPEALING TO MODERATES IS THE WAY FORWARD FOR EVERYONE. Catering to the extremists on either end is not a winning strategy.

Ok? What does this have to do with the my post?

I'm sure we agree that appealing to moderates is a smart political strategy in general elections, but that is not the issue here.

My point is that the pattern of grumbling from the losing side will continue, and potentially get even worse, unless and until both parties come to their senses and stop courting the fringe and instead focus on the mainstream. (Whichever party does it first should be able to clean up in an election.)

[Ruralguy]

I think both Democrats and Republicans have some serious issues to  confront if they are to consistently win elections (though obviously someone has to win, so its a matter of which consistently wins, not whether or not one or the other will eventually win). Republicans, most immediately, have a Trump problem, and with it, kind of a meandering ideology problem.
Sometimes they seem mainly fiscally centered ( lower taxes, lower spending, etc.) and other times, and probably most of the time under Trump, regardless of his stock market fixation, more getting into culture wars.  The Democrats have a serious issue with division of their ranks, with the Squad et al on one side, and Spanberger, Luria, some other House critters, Sinema, Manchin on the other.  Fair or not, Biden is taking the blame on this division, as well as inflation, corona, Afghanistan (which is weird, because nobody wanted us to really stay there) and whatever else. I am trying to analyze it with some distance, and in doing so, I don't really see one side consistently having an advantage, though since Dems are in control now, its easier for them to be blamed and thus lose in some way. The Republicans biggest vulnerability is unforced errors from Trump (yes, even with him out). Their second biggest would be fixation on relatively minor issues such as critical race theory ( I mean minor in terms of the vast array of issues---not that it isn't a worthy topic). it might help win a local race or two, but nationally, I don't think it will cut it in the end. 

[Sun_Worshiper]

Conservatives in this thread need to get a grip on reality. Republicans literally tried to overturn the results of a free and fair national election.

According to Gallup, in 2021, percentages of American voters:

• Republican 31%
• Democrat 27%
• Independent 41%

For either party to win, they have to win a majority of independents. If they lose, it's because they didn't appeal to enough independents. APPEALING TO MODERATES IS THE WAY FORWARD FOR EVERYONE. Catering to the extremists on either end is not a winning strategy.

Ok? What does this have to do with the my post?

I'm sure we agree that appealing to moderates is a smart political strategy in general elections, but that is not the issue here.

My point is that the pattern of grumbling from the losing side will continue, and potentially get even worse, unless and until both parties come to their senses and stop courting the fringe and instead focus on the mainstream. (Whichever party does it first should be able to clean up in an election.)

Republican grumbling has morphed into a series of lies and conspiracy theories about voter fraud that have gone mainstream in the party and that are threatening our democratic institutions. You, as a "moderates are always better guy," should be horrified by this, but instead you keep hand waving it away by saying both sides are bad. Sure, Democrats have their extreme wing and they are not helping Democrats electorally, but they are not a clear and present threat to democracy the way that the Republican extremists have become.

And look, you have to stop dancing around this: Republicans tried to overturn the results of the last election. They egged on an attack on the capital. Most House Rs voted against certifying election results, based on fraud claims that have no basis in reality. Most Rs in Congress are still unwilling to acknowledge that Trump lost the election or to denounce the capital attackers. At the state level, Rs are trying to make rules that will allow their partisans to interfere with the certification processes. This is not a TWITTER issue - this is really happening.

[marshwiggle]

And look, you have to stop dancing around this: Republicans tried to overturn the results of the last election. They egged on an attack on the capital. Most House Rs voted against certifying election results, based on fraud claims that have no basis in reality. Most Rs in Congress are still unwilling to acknowledge that Trump lost the election or to denounce the capital attackers. At the state level, Rs are trying to make rules that will allow their partisans to interfere with the certification processes. This is not a TWITTER issue - this is really happening.

Just a reminder; I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm not even American. But the more time spent harping about the past (by either party) rather than focusing on the future, the more likely things are to get worse rather than better.

Let me provide a Canadian cautionary tale.
Leading up to the election in Fall 2021, the Conservative party was actually in the lead for a while. However, the leader was pushed on whether all MPs would be required to be vaccinated to serve in the House of Commons. The leader, who was fully vaccinated, refused to say. Over 70% of Canadians were vaccinated at that time, and the majority favoured requiring vaccinations. After that, the Conservatives lost ground and lost the election.

TRYING TO NOT ALIENATE THE SMALL FRINGE COST THE SUPPORT OF THE MAINSTREAM. That hill was not worth dying on. (And eventually, after the election, the leader required that MPs be vaccinated. Too little, too late.)


A party that supports policies that most people see as sane and reasonable, and that rejects the rhetoric of the extremist loonies, will do better than one that courts the loonies in the long run. Courting the loonies may result in a win, but it's a bigger gamble than appealing to the much bigger population of moderates.

[Sun_Worshiper]

And look, you have to stop dancing around this: Republicans tried to overturn the results of the last election. They egged on an attack on the capital. Most House Rs voted against certifying election results, based on fraud claims that have no basis in reality. Most Rs in Congress are still unwilling to acknowledge that Trump lost the election or to denounce the capital attackers. At the state level, Rs are trying to make rules that will allow their partisans to interfere with the certification processes. This is not a TWITTER issue - this is really happening.

Just a reminder; I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm not even American. But the more time spent harping about the past (by either party) rather than focusing on the future, the more likely things are to get worse rather than better.

Let me provide a Canadian cautionary tale.
Leading up to the election in Fall 2021, the Conservative party was actually in the lead for a while. However, the leader was pushed on whether all MPs would be required to be vaccinated to serve in the House of Commons. The leader, who was fully vaccinated, refused to say. Over 70% of Canadians were vaccinated at that time, and the majority favoured requiring vaccinations. After that, the Conservatives lost ground and lost the election.

TRYING TO NOT ALIENATE THE SMALL FRINGE COST THE SUPPORT OF THE MAINSTREAM. That hill was not worth dying on. (And eventually, after the election, the leader required that MPs be vaccinated. Too little, too late.)


A party that supports policies that most people see as sane and reasonable, and that rejects the rhetoric of the extremist loonies, will do better than one that courts the loonies in the long run. Courting the loonies may result in a win, but it's a bigger gamble than appealing to the much bigger population of moderates.

You're making a point about electoral politics - winning elections by appealing to moderates - and that is a fine point that I mostly agree with. But that is not the focus of this thread or of my post, which are focused on the ongoing attacks on the democratic system. If the democratic system is effectively undermined or dismantled, then playing to moderates or giving a forward looking message won't matter. That is the issue here.

[marshwiggle]

You're making a point about electoral politics - winning elections by appealing to moderates - and that is a fine point that I mostly agree with. But that is not the focus of this thread or of my post, which are focused on the ongoing attacks on the democratic system. If the democratic system is effectively undermined or dismantled, then playing to moderates or giving a forward looking message won't matter. That is the issue here.

But that's exactly the point; what undermines the democratic system is people from different parties trying to focus on what divides people rather than on what unites them.  The more parties spend their time on actions for which there is broad consensus, the safer the system is. If one party doesn't want to do this, then they will ultimately lose to the party more willing to do this.

[Istiblennius]

One would think that making sure everyone can vote as easily as possible would be unifying, but it is not. And that is because one party has declared, openly, that if every American could vote they would never win another election. So rather than considering how they could package their ideas or modify them a bit to meet the needs of the broader consituency, they openly try to stack the deck, and then if that doesn't do the trick they resort to violence.
The argument that Dems are terrible communicators is legit. They are. The argument that some of the progressive Dems are too far left for much of the country is legit. The argument that both parties are equally bad for democracy is a logical fallacy of what aboutism and that logical fallacy is probably the most dangerous threat to our democracy. It is time to stop pretending that what is happening with some (not all - I love you Mike Murphy!) of the republican party is normal.

[downer]

The Republicans have Fascists among them. Yet people don't say that makes them unelectable.

It's fine for a party to include a wide range of opinion.

I am curious as to why in the US, democratic socialism is more scary than fascism.

[Parasaurolophus]

The Republicans have Fascists among them. Yet people don't say that makes them unelectable.

It's fine for a party to include a wide range of opinion.

I am curious as to why in the US, democratic socialism is more scary than fascism.

I assume it's decades of cold war messaging.