Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lisper 2646 days ago
That's because one of the two political parties has only minority support and thus depends on a long list of dirty tricks to remain in power.
2 comments

That's a gross misunderstanding of the electorate. The Republicans didn't have the national majority vote this presidential election, but in Congress that's irrelevant. Have you been to Utah, or any of the other heartland states? They have overwhelming majority support.

One of the worst problems in the country right now is that things have become so geographically polarized. Many people live so deep in their (red|blue) bubble that they don't even know anyone who votes for the other side.

> Have you been to Utah, or any of the other heartland states?

Yes. I grew up in Kentucky and Tennessee, and went to college in Virginia. The first time I moved to a town of more than 30,000 (Los Angeles) I was 24. So I am very familiar with the culture of "middle America".

Yes, Republicans have overwhelming majority support in many districts, but they would not hold a majority in the House without gerrymandering [1] and they would not hold a majority in the Senate without the inherent bias towards small states built into the two-senators-per-state system. (I guess it's not fair to call that a "dirty trick", but I do think it's fair to apply that label to a lot of the things that Mitch McConnell has done as Senate majority leader.) Also, without that bias, no Republican would have been elected president such George H.W. Bush.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/11/08/how-gerrym...

Yes and no. I live next door to a couple (who have become our friends) that are ideologically opposed to us. Despite our houses being physically next to each other, we might as well inhabit a different world when it comes to politics. It would not be accurate to say they disagree with us on the issues, because to get to disagreement we would at least need to agree on the underlying facts. Without that structure, any discussion stalls immediately. It's like living in a different country.
Show them lots of love. :)
The apparent increased partisanship is the result of FPTP & gerrymandering coupled with engagement driven corporate media.

I've served as the captain in the largest precinct in the most "liberal" legislative district (LD) in one of the most "liberal" states. I've been doorbelling my precinct for 10 years. My LD's GOTV efforts is specifically credited for winning multiple statewide offices and initiatives.

The people (voters) aren't any where nearly as partisan as the election results. But if you went by media accounts, we're all treehugging socialists. The truth on the ground is there's a HUGE variety of opinions, positions.

I think it'd be disingenuous to call either party's support a "minority" when they collectively represent 55% of voters as of 2014. https://www.people-press.org/interactives/party-id-trend/
One of the many dirty tricks that the Republicans use to remain in power is to pass laws that selectively disenfranchise minorities and other likely Democratic voters. So I don't think this is disingenuous at all. The fact that fewer people vote is in no small measure because of Republican dirty tricks [1].

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/us/politics/voting-suppre...

Ah, my mistake: I interpreted your comment as referring to a statistical minority, rather than a racial/ethnic one.
I deliberately chose that phraseology to be ambiguous. But what is not ambiguous is that the Republicans engage in dirty tricks (gerrymandering [1], stripping the governor of powers after an election where a Democrat is elected [2], passing laws to disenfranchise demographic minorities [3], running candidates with blatant conflicts of interest [4], and just flat-out breaking the law [5]) far more often than Democrats do.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-power-that-gerry...

[2] https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/14/scott-walker-lame-...

[3] https://www.npr.org/2018/10/23/659784277/republican-voter-su...

[4] https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/16/opinions/brian-kemp-georgia-v...

[5] http://time.com/5535292/north-carolina-election-fraud/

I think it is a valid observation that statistically, the Republican Party represents fewer citizens per politician than the Democratic Party. This is partly due to geography and the deliberate choices of Senate representation, and partly due to the skillful manipulation of state politics by the Republican Party. The Democrats collectively forgot for a while that politics starts at the local level, unsexy as it seems compared to, say, POTUS, and the Republicans cleaned their clock.

Of course, currently the Democratic Party relies heavily on actual racial/gender minorities, but if they are smart they understand how fleeting that association can be, there is no guarantee it will remain durable over time. Especially as the number of older white male voters dwindles through natural attrition, it is pretty likely that the demographics of the parties are going to evolve.

Eventually white people are going to figure out they want healthcare and black people are going to figure out they want guns and all hell will break loose.
There are currently four groups of voters: left, right, won't, and can't.