Americans don't want change
*It's been a while since I've logged on and penned an essay, but life has been hectic.*
As we draw near to the midterms (or any election for that matter), we are drowned in the same messages that crop up every election cycle:
Americans want change.
Americans want a 3rd party.
Americans are hungry for someone who listens to them.
And it is all a lie.
The rebuttal is opinion polls.
That looks like Americans want a 3rd party, that Americans are clamoring for something different. But these polls and pundits miss the point (as always).
Why do we continue to cling to a reality of what people say vs. what people actually do? Humans are prone to lying, prone to cognitive dissonance, prone to doing everything except telling the truth.
I could tell polls that I go to the gym everyday, but you won't find me near the bench press.
An addict could say that they quit the "stuff", yet hours later find themselves going back to satiate their craving.
Let's take a look at the American people:
Roughly 25% vote for Democrats, 25% vote for Republicans, 49% don't vote, and 1% do 3rd parties.
For a people who want change, if we look at the past 40 years of American politics, we see nothing but R's and D's.
"I want change, so I'll vote for the same people."
"I want change, so I won't vote and somehow that will cause things to change."
Change would come by either not voting for the same things, voting for 3rd parties, or doing things outside of electoral politics (strikes, protests, etc.). And yet, people do not do it. For people who talk about wanting change, oscillating between D's and R's is not change.
3rd parties do exist. There are several small ones, and a few larger ones. The Green Party was on the ballot for close to 50 states, the Libertarians on all 50. And yet, during the worst election potentially in American history, they hardly made a statistical blip.
I'm tired of being told the same messages over and over. That politicians and pundits need to listen to the American people, that somehow if they just gave the people what they want, everything would be great.
No. Words are meaningless when the actions contradict them. I won't listen to the American people; I will watch their actions.
Americans say they want good jobs, yet their actions say they do not since they vote for capitalist Democrats and Republicans who destroy their livelihoods.
Americans say they like Medicare and Social Security, yet their actions say they do not as they vote for Democrats who tried to cut Social Security and Republicans who are talking about cutting both those programs.
Americans say they want better schools, yet their actions say they do not as they put into power Democrats and Republicans who continue to privatize education.
Americans say they want change, yet their actions say that they continue to want the status quo.
Americans have shown time and time again that they want their nation to be a disgrace to the world; so be it. If that is what they want, then give it to them.
Americans continue to lash out and be angry about the state of their lives. They cling to demagogues and fascists. The reality is that the only people to blame for the state of their lives is themselves.
This isn't some bootstrap garbage; this is merely addressing what Americans actually want. Americans have shot themselves in the foot for decades and they scream out that someone is shooting their foot. I'm pointing out that it is Americans themselves that are shooting themselves in the foot. I will not coddle them or infantilize them. Americans refuse to take responsibility for the actions that they choose. Americans have chosen for decades what they want their nation to be, by their actions. So be it. Instead of sifting through opinion polls or rationalizing what people are doing, I will continue to look at what people do.
The American people have shown us what they want; we just need to actually believe them.
Comments
Consider Brazil...
The candidate they wanted to vote for is in prison on charges with no evidence to support them. Consider 2016 when Sanders was denied his run. We are not allowed to vote for change because it isn't on the ballot. Scientific studies support the fact that democracy no longer exists in America. We are an oligarchy.
That isn't what I want. I vote, but I don't have much of a choice.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
@Lookout Alright, let's look at it
Alright, let's look at it.
Brazil is a little bit harder, actually, any other nation within America's sphere is a tad more difficult to analyze. Often, the overbearing hand of American influence and imperialism distorts and changes potential decision making. You are correct that the most popular candidate in Brazil was jailed, leaving two awful candidates in which the most awful one won.
Regarding Sanders... oofta. Yes, Sanders was denied his run in that it was a rigged primary. The problem was was that he bent the knee and went along with the farce. He had choices and that is the one he made. He could have went on to do an independent run but the man who was an independent his whole life suddenly didn't want to be one anymore.
Regarding voting for change not being on the ballot, as I said, the Greens were on almost all 50 state and the Libertarians were on all 50. Considering that I vote for Greens or socialists, and regardless of my stance on libertarians, all of those would be significant departures from the normality of the duopoly.
Do I have this right?
You "vote" for change?
How's that been working?
Your point is taken on Sanders, however. Moreover, there is credible analysis that suggests Trump would have lost if Sanders was the Democratic candidate in 2016. But if Hillary stayed in the race, then Trump would win.
The primary was rigged because, as early as January 2016, Party leaders were well aware of such an outcome. Change was close, but never to be. By hook or crook.
@Pluto's Republic Well, out of anything
Well, out of anything I could do, voting is the easiest.
I mean, here are the options:
1) Don't vote, which will keep the status quo.
2) Vote D or R, which keeps the status quo.
3) Vote 3rd party, which is at least trying something
4) Do things outside electoral politics.
So option 3 is the easiest thing one can do.
Regarding Sanders, yeah he would have won. But he refused to win. If he ran as an independent he would have won. But he cares more about our rigged system than the people.
In a three-way Presidential race
...it seems unlikely that Sanders would have won. Certainly, Sanders and Clinton would have split the Democratic vote — but I don't think Trump's numbers would fall as much as the two Dems. On the other hand, I sense a vast number of voting ghosts from the historically unrepresented American Left, that could have emerged and seized the opportunity to cast their first meaningful vote. In my view, the potential for that has been building for more than a century. It's a tantalizing, mind-expanding thought. It would likely restructure the politics philosophy in America and lay down novel visions of the future for American society a remix beyond the restricted spectrum utilized now.
That's probably true
The only way Bernie would have beat Trump is one on one. A similar thing happened in 1992 when Ross Perot split the right leaning vote with George Bush, giving Bill Clinton the plurality and thus began the rule of the centrist Democrats and the decline of the liberals. But hey, at least they finally beat the Reagan Republicans, which I think is all that mattered to them.
Beware the bullshit factories.
The gubernatorial race in Michigan offers people
a number of choices. Most of those who do vote will vote Democratic or Republican. Why? I don't think it's because they don't want options beside Democratic or Republican.
I think it's because newer parties don't have a level playing field. They don't have the money for ads. Democrats and Republicans freeze them out of debates and off the ballots. Establishment media pretends they don't exist, other than for possibly some condescending article and perhaps some negative press if it seems the candidates are making any headway.
That was mainstream media's pattern with Bernie. At first, near silence. Then, he was the cranky, rumpled former Mayor of Burlington who borrowed a hairdo from the nutty professor in Back to the Future, a bit of a joke, really. And only God could have figured out what, if anything, Bernie had done since his mayoral days--or, for that matter, what a spectacular Mayor of Burlington he had been. Then, as his popularity grew, he was the socialist Communist head gangbanger of the Bernie Bros, who, if elected, would surrender truth, justice and the American Way to RUSSIA.)
People in Michigan would be lucky to know parties other than Democrats and Republicans were in the race, much less know what each of the candidates stood for. IOW, it's a "vast" establishment "conspiracy" to ensure newer parties get nowhere. And, if you notice, in the wiki article I linked above, Republicans, Democrats and Libertarians were referred to as major parties, while all others were relegated to inconsequential status.
as institutions, Republicans and Democrats and their donors and media have spent enormous amounts of time and money to ensure that (a) only Republicans or Democrats are viable; and (b) there is not a huge amount of difference between Republicans and Democrats on things that matter to plutocrats.
Why do those who do not show up at the polls stay away? I'm guessing it's because they've learned that either the Republican or the Democrat will win and, either way, it doesn't matter. When people believed that a Democratic Congress was standing between them and the right to unionize, the right to vote and the right to benefit from Social Security, Medicare and, yes, damn it, welfare, they voted. Nothing could have kept the less affluent classes, especially union members, away from the polls when I was a kid.
Now, we come to the 25 to 30% of each party that goes to the polls and votes. Even as Bush's popularity tanked, I don't think it went below 29%. Each party has its diehards. However, all of them are not always voting voting the same anymore. At least not on the federal level. For the longest time after Lincoln, Republicans were considered the party of decent people, while Democrats were considered the party of slavery, the Klan, and later Jim Crow and the party of political corruption, as with Tammany Hall, the Cook County political machine, etc. And Presidential elections reflected that, pretty much from Lincoln to FDR,
For the longest time after FDR-Truman, Democrats were considered the party of the New Deal. For the longest time after Kennedy-Johnson, and even today, Democrats were considered the party of equal rights, race, gender, religion, etc. While Presidential elections did not always reflect that, Congressional elections did--until the first mid-term after Clinton.
Now, the people who vote are not always voting the same way. Republicans got Congress back after Bubba's first two years, but lost it in 2006, after Bush Cheney came a cropper. Then Democrats lost it after Obama's first two years. Bernie gave many hope that change was possible; and Trump not only jumped on that train but rode it to victory.
Republicans may lose it now, although I'm not sure that's certain. And, since Clinton, Presidents get 8 years and then the party of the President changes for the next eight years. So, the vote does change.
I think it's reactive. People didn't like what happened after Clinton took office, so Dems lost Congress and Clinton became the only President (so far) to be elected only by plurality twice. The same thing happened after no WMD in Iraq hit the fan; and then again, after Obama spent his first two years on Obamacare and the Cat Food Commission.
I think people do want change, but they don't get what they want, no matter how they vote. So, they've gone about getting change the wrong way, flipping between two all too similar parties that are supposed to be opposed to each other. As a result, now they are talking about "a third party," barely aware that we already have many more parties than three, especially on the state level. And Republicans, Democrats and the rest of the plutocracy will do all in their power to keep it that way.
Where Bernie and "Our Revolution" has figured in all that is way above my pay grade.
I agree Americans want change and have for years.
This has been a sore spot with voters going beyond the
Partisan Ds and Rs will vote for their party's stooges no matter what. I think Americans are so pissed off at "government", they abandoned the lesser of evil strategies years ago. Lesser of evil implies there is at least some good in one of the two. Americans now know there isn't an ounce of good in either and they ping-pong between rejecting both of them. Anyone remember the House banking scandal??? Oh the outrage. Approval ratings for Congress have gone nowhere but down and down reaching new lows. Nothing changed then, and nothing will now. People know it and are frustrated as all hell. Vote, don't vote, vote third party, write in Daffy Duck. Nothing works.
Wishing on a star is at least doing something too, and it is just as effective as voting third party. I'm sorry, but working hard at something futile gets no credit for a being better choice in my book. It is like trying to put out a forest fire by spitting at it. I know. I tried it in 2016. I gave my vote to Stein in MI. What a joke. Stein's 60K MI votes had less impact on politics than the 100,000 MI voters who didn't vote for President by leaving that choice on their ballots blank. Green isn't even listed as a "major" party in Michigan. Doubt it is anywhere. Add in how all the Stein voters then denied that their votes "impacted the election outcomes" when they could have taken credit and claimed power. Hillary lost MI by 10K votes. All the virtue voters could have laid claim to that as their victory. Instead, they turned tail and ran from it just like Bernie ran from his revolution when he endorsed Hillary and continues to endorse the Democratic Party to this day.
We want change all right. It just isn't on the table.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
I think the nut of the problem is our addiction to
LOTE voting. We know the two party system reliably puts terrible candidates on the ballot, yet we believe there’s something to be gained by casting a vote for the lesser terrible, or that somehow we’ll arrive at a different and favorable result this time.
Our electorate is putty in the hands of disinformation, emotional or fear based marketing, and identifying with a party’s branding message, regardless of whether they ever actually deliver on their promises. Many are living paycheck to paycheck in the throes of economic insecurity, and don’t have the time, energy or temperament to be able to recognize the scam that is known as Voting in these United States of America. A cure from within the system is hard to imagine unless it’s to be provided by Unicorns and Pixie dust.
I’ll continue to vote for local candidates, third parties and those few on the national level who may not yet be completely in the service of the 1% and their corporation’s best interests, but I do so with no illusion that it will make any discernible difference whatsoever.
“ …and when we destroy nature, we diminish our capacity to sense the divine,and understand who God is, and what our own potential is and duties are as human beings.- RFK jr. 8/26/2024
It's a hell of a conundrum isn't it?
I want to stop the wars and fund programs that help people and lots of other stuff, but I have no avenue to get it. Even when someone tells me that they are going to do those things once they get elected they don't.
There is no way for Americans to get what they want within this duopoly of government. I do think that people voted for Trump for the same reason I voted for Obama. They were told that there candidate would make their lives better. Hillary wasn't saying that so they took a chance just like I did with Obama. Once. As Big Al often states we can't vote our way out of this. But I don't see any other options to change the country. The ones I think might work are things that others won't do.
Yep. Conundrum. Good essay. Good to see you again.
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
Caitlin nails the democrats
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
IMHO
Americans aren't stupid. They are lazy thinkers.
They approach ideology/politics the same way they approach a shopping mall.
They expect to just choose something rather than using their critical thinking skills.
So they are unhappy with the status quo, but there is nothing in the shopping mall of ideas that is actually new. At least not on the tv.
So they end up with something that sounds different but isn't actually different, like Trump
we voted for change in 08
and got snookered by the empty suit
many said after 12 he could do what
he said he would do in 08 cuz he didn't
need to win anymore, more BS after more
BS
Voting only gives the oligarchy legitimacy
which in reality doesn't give amerikans
any choice whatsoever, for if they many of
same old same old club might need a new
residence wearing different suits.
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
Obama is the biggest rat to ever hold office.
I never believed a damn thing he said. I just hoped I was wrong. Worst two votes of my life. If there is karma anywhere, I hope it nails him.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
With you 1000%
if ever anyone deserves karma
he'd be the poster boy for it.
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
Just about everything written here is true.
The biggest problem is we lost. We are almost powerless to implement change. The change we bring about is narrow and fairly quickly neutralized. The sexual assaults by the powerful, the unjust police shootings provoke us enough to take over the narrative, until TPtB corrals and counters that momentum.
I don't think the democrats will ever prevail. They have defined their base as minorities, immigrants, women and the poor with the idea that they will be increasing in numbers. If this is true, either they solve the problems of their base, or they fail to solve these problems. If they solve the problems they free the base to vote any way they want, and the democrats have to find new issues that resonate. If they continue to fail they just manufacture people who are convinced that voting is futile. In polls, if people are not in the base, they don't see themselves represented by democrats. The democrats rarely address economic factors that affect families, (beyond minimum wage) the one thing we all have in common, all our lives. If they do it's at a "welfare benefit" level.
So if the democrats win, they have a shot. Past history says they'll blow it. Then it's republican world. We think as Americans we're strong, won't take any shit, but next time a lot will keep their heads down and mouth shut, doff their caps and throw in a "hail to victory" when they tell us to, just to get by.
Screw it, vote for somebody, anybody. Write in Jill Stein, Bernie, Dick Hertz, Hugh G. Rection, ..... who knows, we might get lucky. Right now it's all we got.