Because people are clearly unhappy with the democratic party, so there’s obviously a market for it. People that would’ve otherwise stayed home instead of voting for the democrats now have a voice. That’s what democracy looks like, at least in most European countries that is. It’s fairly normal to see smaller parties pop up that better represent a subsection of the electorate than to see huge monolithic parties that try to encompass everything.
Oh the paradox of the third party. They’re too weak to make a dent, but also the root of all evil. This sounds like fascism to me.
If they’re so harmless, then why do you care if a very small portion of the electorate votes for them? After all it won’t make a dent, right? :)
If they make such a big dent that the democratic party needs to run smear campaigns against them, then how come they’re so harmless and underrepresented?
To me it looks like you have a dysfunctional system. They are popular enough to be voted by a huge chunk of the electorate, thus hurting the big legacy parties, but your system is built in such a way that they end up being underrepresented at the national level.
Because people are clearly unhappy with the democratic party, so there’s obviously a market for it. People that would’ve otherwise stayed home instead of voting for the democrats now have a voice. That’s what democracy looks like, at least in most European countries that is. It’s fairly normal to see smaller parties pop up that better represent a subsection of the electorate than to see huge monolithic parties that try to encompass everything.
There isn’t though. No third party has ever won the presidency.
In Congress, there has never been even 1% of them being third party. Same with the senate.
Where exactly is the market, and why is it not at all reflected in any part of the elected government?
Is it perhaps because it doesn’t exist?
Oh the paradox of the third party. They’re too weak to make a dent, but also the root of all evil. This sounds like fascism to me.
If they’re so harmless, then why do you care if a very small portion of the electorate votes for them? After all it won’t make a dent, right? :)
If they make such a big dent that the democratic party needs to run smear campaigns against them, then how come they’re so harmless and underrepresented?
To me it looks like you have a dysfunctional system. They are popular enough to be voted by a huge chunk of the electorate, thus hurting the big legacy parties, but your system is built in such a way that they end up being underrepresented at the national level.
I didn’t claim that anywhere.
The US does, so the looks are correct.