sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better. if we get rid of third parties entirely just so we have a slightly less horrible president for the next four years, then there's zero chance of the system ever improving. at least people voting third party are trying to gradually move things in the right direction.
hahahha--machinist---that's a good one! My eyes have been open for 78 fuckin' years mister. And believe me, I know YOU and your type ---thoroughly. Yes--I know exactly what the right thinks and does and what they do/have done never helps the working class--machinists included. I don't know how old you are , but evidently, you must think that Mr David Dennison actually gives a shit about anyone but his family and of course--above ALL ELSE$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. For him. I just can't fathom why you and others like him to the point of worship.
That's my thinking too. I just vote my conscience and maybe someday we'll get someone good. (Tulsi Gabbard 2020!)
I understand what you're saying...but look what we have now. Do you honestly believe Trump is a better president than Clinton would have been?
I never said we should outlaw third parties. Perot won 19% of the vote in 1992, this may have helped B. Clinton win. Nader won 3% of the vote in 2000, many feel this coat Gore the election. The effects of the last election can be debated. Did third-party candidates Jill Stein and Gary Johnson lose Clinton the election? Did third-party candidates cost Hillary Clinton the election? Third Party Votes Could Have Cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency All of these articles point out that those who voted third party may not have changed the election if they didn't vote third party because they may not have voted if not third party, or they may have voted for another third part. All I'm saying is IF all the third party voters who didn't like Trump had voted for Clinton Trump may not have been elected. And I think that would have been a good thing. Just my opinion.
The problem - with the OP - is not so much that Trump likes chaos as it is his insistence on creating chaos. The North Korea talk is a good example. There are lots of good reasons to take that meeting - but his whole administration, his Secretary of State, his VP, etc were all working toward a different plan that had been in place for a year when he changed direction entirely on his own on a whim. Same with the steel tariffs. George W was thrown into chaos by 9/11. This idiot inflicts his own wounds
That's the way I figured the Dems would see it. Yet they followed the ticket no matter what happened. I'm reminded that Trump considered running on a third party ticket. The Republicans made him swear he wouldn't do that. So he swore he wouldn't and kept his promise. So they now have to realize that they did this, not him.
The EC is not corrupt but it isn’t necessary anymore. Gerrymandering itself is legal though it’s difficult to imagine that helped Trump win
As I understand it, it's to make sure candidates campaign all over America-- not just huge population centers.
It’s original purpose was to prevent the populous from electing a demagogue. It doesn’t help broaden campaigns. It makes that worse. There’s no reason for a dem to come to Texas or a GOP to come to Cali with the EC because they either get all the EC votes or none