A symptom of dysfunction: fewer than half of voters choose almost every candidate that appears on a ballot

Democrats comprise 30% of registered voters. Republicans: 29% (source). Yet, in most cases, these two parties choose 100% of the candidates who appear on the ballot for a general election. In some cases the situation is more dire (for example, California's "jungle primary" all but guarantees that in many if not most cases the only two candidates who appear will be Democrats).

Fewer than half of each party's constituency turns out in any primary contest. Here's a good example: in South Carolina's recent Democratic Primary, "record turnout" of 500,000 voters occurred. There are 3.4M registered voters in the state (source). Similar statistics can be found in almost any state. Take California: 20,660,465 registered voters, of which about 9 million are democrats, but only 4,951,324 people in total voted (not all these are democrats; source).

As if it weren't obvious from the extreme inequality and other issues plaguing the country, the correct conclusion from the above is this: We don't live in a functioning democracy. It has been set up purposefully by the two parties to maintain political power even when they are technically outnumbered. The fact that the media doesn't raise this constantly is an indication of their duplicity.

So when, say, a democratic partisan tries to guilt someone into voting for their nominees because otherwise it's a vote for the Republican, remind them that it's only this way because of their support of our dysfunctional oligarchy. The reason we have Trump has a direct link to the democratic party's complicit arrangement of our political system to operate the way it does. Same as if Hillary had been elected: we'd be afflicted with her only because of the rigged system.

I'm #NeverBiden, and in fact I'm pretty close to #NeverDemocrat (goes without saying for republicans--I don't support fascists) out of protest. The fact that someone even chooses to put a "D" or an "R" after their name, other than for strategic voting, e.g., in primary contests due to the rigged nature of these things, is in my mind practically a disqualification when it comes to support. They're part of the problem, and need to be stopped. I don't care how aligned they are with my political goals; on this one, support of either "major" party is the same as being opposed to having an actual democracy.

Share
up
15 users have voted.

Comments

QMS's picture

Especially like...

having an actual democracy

create and invent

up
5 users have voted.

question everything

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

In the sense of committed partisans, anyway. On Jan 2, indies were 45% of the electorate (indies+third parties, that is). The start of the primary season correlated with the numbers going up for both parties. I would be surprised if some of the rise in the Democratic party numbers did not come from indies/third party types joining the Dems to vote in the primary, like I did in 2016.

Do you think those people are likely to stay, or even to come back again? I don't.

We don't need to burn it down. They'll burn it down. The only thing to keep this system alive is people's determination to believe in it. What they don't want is for a majority of people to consider the system fraudulent.

up
3 users have voted.

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver