Iowa Caucus 2020 - MegaThread

[Fugus]

people are already free to vote for whoever they want in the presidential election. there's no "pre chosen option", you can write in bugs bunny if you want.
parties are just there to help people with like minded ideologies get elected by providing more resources. thats it.
even under a "ranked choice" voting system you would still be a minority party, and still have to work with larger ones to get things done.

Alright, are you really going to force me to explain the exact same thing repeatedly as to why your view doesn't work and ignores important parts of reality?

Under Ranked choice, the person could vote for whom they wanted in the 3rd party and then have the other pick being the "Electable" candidate so that people can vote for whom they want without it being a spoiler.

That option doesn't exist in the current system which actually makes 3rd parties nonviable.

If 3rd parties aren't viable and only act as spoilers and the 2 big tents don't allow open elections within their ranks and letting the voters choose, then the voters aren't given a fair choice. Until your logic quits ignoring these facts, you will continue to be wrong because you keep ignoring important, game changing, information.

[starlord]

Alright, are you really going to force me to explain the exact same thing repeatedly as to why your view doesn't work and ignores important parts of reality?

Under Ranked choice, the person could vote for whom they wanted in the 3rd party and then have the other pick being the "Electable" candidate so that people can vote for whom they want without it being a spoiler.

That option doesn't exist in the current system which actually makes 3rd parties nonviable.

If 3rd parties aren't viable and only act as spoilers and the 2 big tents don't allow open elections within their ranks and letting the voters choose, then the voters aren't given a fair choice. Until your logic quits ignoring these facts, you will continue to be wrong because you keep ignoring important, game changing, information.

its not game changing information. the parties that appeal to the most people are the ones who succeed. if a 3rd party does that, they can win. if you arent willing to throw your vote behind it because you think it won't win, that kind of speaks for itself.

[Fugus]

its not game changing information. the parties that appeal to the most people are the ones who succeed. if a 3rd party does that, they can win. if you arent willing to throw your vote behind it because you think it won't win, that kind of speaks for itself.

You just ignored how the US election system works and why people call 3rd parties "Wasted" and "Spoiler" votes. Until you actually start to include that into your thought process like the majority of American voters, you will continue to be wrong.

[starlord]

You just ignored how the US election system works and why people call 3rd parties "Wasted" and "Spoiler" votes. Until you actually start to include that into your thought process like the majority of American voters, you will continue to be wrong.

you keep ignoring that 3rd parties have literally won before.
people call 3rd party votes "wasted" because they are usually for small niche parties that have no chance of succeeding. ranked choice voting would not change that at all.

[Fugus]

you keep ignoring that 3rd parties have literally won before.
people call 3rd party votes "wasted" because they are usually for small niche parties that have no chance of succeeding. ranked choice voting would not change that at all.

Ok,

Tell me, outside of Washington who was there before the parties, what 3rd party candidate has ever won the presidency?

[starlord]

Ok,

Tell me, outside of Washington who was there before the parties, what 3rd party candidate has ever won the presidency?

abraham lincoln ran as a republican when none had ever won the presidency before.

[Endus]

Ok,

Tell me, outside of Washington who was there before the parties, what 3rd party candidate has ever won the presidency?

Harrison and Lincoln, if you allow for it being the second election after their "third party" supplanted another. In Lincoln's case, the Republicans and Whigs split the vote in 1856, and the Republicans picked up enough by 1860 for Lincoln to take up the mantle.

Harrison didn't last long in the office, but that's down to typhoid, not anything political.

Every new party is a "third party", until they're the 2nd or 1st.

[beanman12345]

abraham lincoln ran as a republican when none had ever won the presidency before.

Yeah but Lincoln was not third party, it was just a new party at the time.

[Fugus]

abraham lincoln ran as a republican when none had ever won the presidency before.

The Republican party was already a big 2 party as they had replaced the Whig party that had already collapsed about a decade before.

Try again.

[starlord]

Yeah but Lincoln was not third party, it was just a new party at the time.

so? its not like they were an established party with a record of success so voters had "no choice!!" as fugus keeps saying.
they consolidated support and won.
he complains that there's a risk his vote won't "win" and wants to minimize that risk.

[Fugus]

so? its not like they were an established party with a record of success so voters had "no choice!!" as fugus keeps saying.
they consolidated support and won.
he complains that there's a risk his vote won't "win" and wants to minimize that risk.

Tell me, outside of Washington who was there before the parties, what 3rd party candidate has ever won the presidency?

You have yet to actually name one.
@Endus one sec on your response, I noticed i butchered it horribly.

[beanman12345]

so? its not like they were an established party with a record of success so voters had "no choice!!" as fugus keeps saying.
they consolidated support and won.
he complains that there's a risk his vote won't "win" and wants to minimize that risk.

they really didn't have a choice, there was no other party, the democrats had basically complete control, due to cheating and fuckery, and the whigs basically collapsed on themselves. If Lincoln ran as a whig he woulda been destroyed.

[starlord]

Lincoln was before the parties so not really a good example and from what I can read, Harrison was a whig before it collapsed.

- - - Updated - - -
Tell me, outside of Washington who was there before the parties, what 3rd party candidate has ever won the presidency?

You have yet to actually name one.

i already did, the party had never held a presidency before.
they were a third party, and consolidated to become a major one. thats how parties succeed.
your chief complaint seems to be that a minority cannot succeed in a democracy, which is just.... what?

[Fugus]

Harrison and Lincoln, if you allow for it being the second election after their "third party" supplanted another. In Lincoln's case, the Republicans and Whigs split the vote in 1856, and the Republicans picked up enough by 1860 for Lincoln to take up the mantle.

Harrison didn't last long in the office, but that's down to typhoid, not anything political.

Every new party is a "third party", until they're the 2nd or 1st.

Harrison was Whig before it collapsed though and was still a top 2 party was it not?

And by your thing with Lincoln, you are talking about when Whig collapsed around 1954 from what I am reading. So Lincoln was still a big 2 president as was Harrison.

You are talking about people who literally were at the cusp of parties collapsing and losing big 2 status to point to.

You are proving my point here.

Never has a 3rd party candidate won the president and it took a previous big 2 party collapsing and another to replace it before they won. And a good deal of that is because the whole "Spoiler" mentality with it.

It will literally take the Democratic party collapsing for Sanders to win as a 3rd party candidate regardless of how popular his policies are given that system and mind set of the voters.

- - - Updated - - -

i already did, the party had never held a presidency before.
they were a third party, and consolidated to become a major one. thats how parties succeed.
your chief complaint seems to be that a minority cannot succeed in a democracy, which is just.... what?

I didn't say "Which president had won from a party for the first time for that party".

I said "Outside of Washington who was there before the parties, what 3rd party candidate has ever won the presidency?"

You have yet to give one. And if that party had already ate a previous party and became a big 2, that doesn't answer my question as they weren't 3rd party at that point.

[starlord]

Harrison was Whig before it collapsed though and was still a top 2 party was it not?

And by your thing with Lincoln, you are talking about when Whig collapsed around 1954 from what I am reading. So Lincoln was still a big 2 president as was Harrison.

You are talking about people who literally were at the cusp of parties collapsing and losing big 2 status to point to.

You are proving my point here.

Never has a 3rd party candidate won the president and it took a previous big 2 party collapsing and another to replace it before they won. And a good deal of that is because the whole "Spoiler" mentality with it.

It will literally take the Democratic party collapsing for Sanders to win as a 3rd party candidate regardless of how popular his policies are given that system and mind set of the voters.

how unfortunate for sanders that parties exist that people prefer over him?

[Fugus]

how unfortunate for sanders that parties exist that people prefer over him?

Now you are trying to pull something that would get me infracted for calling out. You really admitting defeat already since you just proven you can't name one.

[starlord]

Now you are trying to pull something that would get me infracted for calling out. You really admitting defeat already since you just proven you can't name one.

i did and you said "it doesn't count because a third party succeeding means they aren't a third party" lol.

[Fugus]

i did and you said "it doesn't count because a third party succeeding means they aren't a third party" lol.

No, I pointed out that when they had won, they had already replaced an existing major party that had collapsed and was no longer 3rd party.

I didn't ask what president took over after a major political party had collapsed entirely and what was once a 3rd party had took its place at which point they were no longer 3rd party and, in fact, were actually a major party at that point.

I asked what 3rd party candidate had won the presidency. That requires that the party be a 3rd party at the time and not a top 2 major political a party. And I made that distinction especially to avoid the word play you just tried.

[Endus]

Harrison was Whig before it collapsed though and was still a top 2 party was it not?

It wasn't a party with any heft 2 elections prior to Harrison's election. It was a third party, until it became one of the top two.

Nobody was saying a President would be elected from the third-most-popular party at the time We were pointing out that the current two parties can, either of them, be replaced in their prevalence by what was a third party, up to that point. Just by Americans voting differently.

And by your thing with Lincoln, you are talking about when Whig collapsed around 1954 from what I am reading. So Lincoln was still a big 2 president as was Harrison.

This is an attempt to put the cart before the horse.

They were leaders of what had been a third party and then became one of the major two. They both prove that the idea that a third party can never take a place of power, that idea is false, because it happened, with both of them.

No one was talking about the possibility of the President being a representative of the third-most-popular party in his own election. That's a straw man you're inserting, and it's not a reasonable response.

[starlord]

No, I pointed out that when they had won, they had already replaced an existing major party that had collapsed and was no longer 3rd party.

I didn't ask what president took over after a major political party had collapsed entirely and what was once a 3rd party had took its place at which point they were no longer 3rd party and, in fact, were actually a major party at that point.

thats like saying "you cant say a loser ever won because by definition only winners win and someone who was a loser who won is now a winner so doesn't count."

like yea, third parties exist on the fringes until they garner enough votes to become a major party. thats how it works in all forms of democracy.