Is creating a party for the middle 80% a good idea, as Elon suggested?

[Hatuey]

Because this is the current state of the electorate.

MAGA has been underestimated from day one. Do not underestimate its appeal, nor how many of your friends & neighbors, maybe even family members, vote for it.

Who cares what Musk wants? Or, what his motives are? That he will assist in taking the next election away from MAGA (advertently or inadvertently) is good enough.

I guess imagining middle of the road Russian assets shaving off imaginary points through 3rd parties is living in the real world.

 

[Chomsky]

Yep. And that brand of politics permeates the modern Democratic Party. Obama was the successor to the Clintons, and Biden the bookend. It's basically a repackaged version of Blue Dog Reaganomics, Hawkish foreign policy, and lip service to social justice / inequality.

It's not that Dems have gone too far left, it's that the BASE is overwhelmingly progressive.

Dems have lost their base BECAUSE of their moderation.

On some issues Dems are dragged kicking and screaming towards progress, other times they hold firm on unpopular issues (see Ro Khanna's ideas on rehabbing Elon Musk).

The bolded is hard to say though, Dans La Lune. The Dem Party of the mid and late 20th Century, despite their progression on things like Civil Rights & Social healthcare, had a very strong Blue Dog component.

Those Blue Collar - often Catholic - often Union Workers - were as "Doggy" as you could get! I know this, because these were my people back then!

Those Blue Dogs became Reagan Democrats. Some never returned. More recently, this same crowd (what was left of them) became Trumpers. I know this, because I knew many Reagan Dems, and now know many former-Dem MAGA! Many!

I'm not hard debating here. I'm just throwing this out in a spirit of fruitful discussion.

I'm constantly torn on which direction the Party should go, and only wish I had the answer. But I still believe an argument can be made for moderation, even if I'm not absolutely sure of this being the winning way. I suspect it may.

 

[Chomsky]

I guess imagining middle of the road Russian assets shaving off imaginary points through 3rd parties is living in the real world.

To us? You & I? 'No'. It's not the real world.

But to MAGA / Tea Party / Q-Anon / MTG, this is indeed their world.

Musk will skim some of them off.

 

[Hatuey]

To us? You & I? 'No'. It's not the real world.

But to MAGA / Tea Party / Q-Anon / MTG, this is indeed their world.

Musk will skim some of them off.

Let that real imagination run wild, middle of the Russian road assets love it.

 

[noonereal]

It is stupid to think 80% of Americans are in the middle. Just more clown shit

Question as is. Elon Musk has suggested to create a new party that accommodates the middle 80% of the population.

What do you think about this? On the surface it sounds like a no-brainer for a nation that is politically divided as much as it is. But things are probably a little more complicated than that.

Joey

 

[Chomsky]

Let that real imagination run wild, middle of the Russian road assets love it.

You know Hatuey, I've brought historical record, data, and numerical analysis in support of my position.

You seem to be stuck at blind assertion, which isn't carrying the day.

 

[Hatuey]

You know Hatuey, I've brought historical record, data, and numerical analysis in support of my position.

You seem to be stuck at blind assertions, which aren't carrying the day.

You have brought up elections 16 years apart, and tried to weave a story over 25 years supporting a 3rd party destruction of the GOP.

This isn't numerical analysis or data, it is you fabricating a story out of thin air and hoping for a result that only exists in your imagination.

This is me being polite.

 

[KingLeo]

Kind of a pointless idea thinking you can get 80% of the US voting public to agree on much of anything.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Question as is. Elon Musk has suggested to create a new party that accommodates the middle 80% of the population.

What do you think about this? On the surface it sounds like a no-brainer for a nation that is politically divided as much as it is. But things are probably a little more complicated than that.

Joey

I guess math isn't his strongest suit.

If 20% are "middle" then 80% are committed which we know is nowhere near the case. If anything less than 30% of the US has any intention of voting.

I really, really want to admire this guy but he becomes a bigger asshole by the hour

 

[Fearandloathing]

Who here actually believes Elon is posting about this for totally honest and sincere reasons?
He is proposing THE ELON MUSK PARTY, please bear that in mind, PLEASE.

It amazes me that Americans can watch this guy torch the entire government and then when he smiles and says "third party anyone" they immediately assume he's being altruistic.
Are you ****ing kidding me?

He's not?

Wow. That's really cynical. I believe he loves his country as much as Trump. That is if you confuse assault with love.

 

[KingLeo]

He's not?

Wow. That's really cynical. I believe he loves his country as much as Trump. That is if you confuse assault with love.

Would agree.
To think that Musk has any altruistic notions of doing what is best for the US over his own ambitions is laughable.
One thing Musk and Donnie share is the 'me above all' mentality.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Would agree.
To think that Musk has any altruistic notions of doing what is best for the US over his own ambitions is laughable.
One thing Musk and Donnie share is the 'me above all' mentality.

That's why they "DO/DON'T" get along.

 

[rickc]

Problem is you would have to somehow break the strangle hold that right wing propaganda has on a large portion of that middle.

I don't think that can be done!

 

[stealthycat]

You'd probably be happiest with a "MAGA Party".

But then, you've kinda' already got that now.

I was pretty clear what I said

I cannot get behind almost anything in the Democrat party of 2025
I like conservative GOP view but they fail to execute them over and over and over

a strong 3rd party would be awesome

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Question as is. Elon Musk has suggested to create a new party that accommodates the middle 80% of the population.
What do you think about this? On the surface it sounds like a no-brainer for a nation that is politically divided as much as it is. But things are probably a little more complicated than that.
Joey

not sure how we could 80% of folks on board when

at least 30% of the country lives in alternate facts land

 

[Geoist]

Agreed!

But, it's easier to form a party than change the Constitution. Which is why we have a plethora of non-completive parties of small stature who's only effect is occasional vote spoiling, never rising to Office themselves.

I'm pretty sure you don't need to change the Constitution to implement ranked choice voting (please correct me if I'm wrong). It just needs to be done state-by-state.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Elon Musk is the billionaire who gutted dozens of US government agencies and probably stole terebytes of personal data.

I wouldn't mind seeing Musk deported back to South Africa along with his 4 girlfriends, his 14 kids, and his Adderall stash.

 

[LouC]

Is creating a party for the middle 80% a good idea, as Elon suggested?​

Go for it Mr. Pasty White!

Oh, I voted OTHER in the Poll.

Personally, I would love to see any need for tribal aka Party Affiliation somehow removed from our Federal Electoral Processes.

 

[HonestJoe]

I wouldn't say the system was "intentionally designed" to that affect. Yes, the two parties do what they can to meet that goal.

Not initially, but there are plenty of factors that have been created or maintained to support that, such as political involvement in the electoral process, the fact primaries are managed by state governments, the concept of registering with a party affiliation and restrictions to debates and even ballot access requiring significant established support. As you say, the two major parties do indeed do everything they can to maintain the status-quo and that includes them holding pretty much all of the power to change anything.

However, two dominate parties are the natural fall-out from our type of government and electoral process.

That is certainly a factor too, but not a definitive one on it's own. My own country of the UK is presenting a clear example of that at the moment, with a growing third party (Reform) on top of a significant regional one (SNP). We also had a collation government fairly recently, including a long established third party (Liberal Democrats).

I'd still personally prefer some form of transferable vote system (though not proportional representation IMO) and think it would be good in the US too, but that's just another thing the established parties will work to prevent.

The alternative, might be trying something like a Parliamentarian system of governance. That results in a larger number of parties having their voices heard. Canada and Britain are two peer country examples.

That would be a much more extreme shift that would require extensive constitutional changes. I don't think anything as extreme would be necessary to significantly improve the situation in US politics.

 

[GIJane]

I won't say ""No, it's a bad idea" because I think it would be a good idea BUT

3rd parties generally only end up ****ing one of the established parties. (Ross Perot)

 

[Allan]

The America Party.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Question as is. Elon Musk has suggested to create a new party that accommodates the middle 80% of the population.

What do you think about this? On the surface it sounds like a no-brainer for a nation that is politically divided as much as it is. But things are probably a little more complicated than that.

Joey

Other. The idea that only 20% of the electorate identifies as either demorat, republicant, libertarian or green and the rest (80%) identify as middle (other or independent?) is a false premise.

The primary problem with ‘third’ parties is that they would likely draw more voters from one of the two major parties than the other, thus ensuring the other major party gains even more political power.

 

[poppopfox]

I'd like to see a revival of the Mugwumps!

MUGWUMP
I was a mugwump. We, the mugwumps, a little company made up of the unenslaved of both parties, the very best men to be found in the two great parties--that was our idea of it--voted sixty thousand strong for Mr. Cleveland in New York and elected him. Our principles were high, and very definite. We were not a party; we had no candidates; we had no axes to grind. Our vote laid upon the man we cast it for no obligation of any kind. By our rule we could not ask for office; we could not accept office. When voting, it was our duty to vote for the best man, regardless of his party name. We had no other creed. Vote for the best man--that was creed enough.
- Mark Twain's Autobiography (North American Review, Dec. 21, 1906)

 

[ALiberalModerate]

There is no middle 80%.

 

[JoeyJoystick]

I wouldn't say the system was "intentionally designed" to that affect. Yes, the two parties do what they can to meet that goal. However, two dominate parties are the natural fall-out from our type of government and electoral process.

This is fairly accepted political science.

The alternative, might be trying something like a Parliamentarian system of governance. That results in a larger number of parties having their voices heard. Canada and Britain are two peer country examples.

Check it out -

Here:

Duverger's law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Hi Chomsky,

Having a parliament would solve some of the issues, depending on implementation. But there are more issues. Looking at other countries will quickly show that as well.

Time has shown, over and over again, that their are issues. Here some of them

- Democracy allows for people to be elected. But it is ridiculous that everybody can be elected if they want to. It is unacceptable that a person who does not have education at a sufficiently high level, a certificate of good behaviour from the department of justice, and a high-level of security clearance (when requested) can still be electable for office. All he needs is voted. This is NOT acceptable however way you look at it. And look at the result. If any of these 3 had been applied, Trump would never have been president. Nor would Chavez, Putin, Hitler, or Xi.
- Most democracies date back several hundred years. They were 'designed' during much simpler times. And intended for much simpler people. Yes, there have been updates to the constitution, but it is clear that politics is not keeping up with the pace at which our technology develops. This has resulted in Social Media. Some people, proud of the free speech rights, think it is completely ok that politicians ( or anyone else for that matter) have the right to say things that are utterly wrong. There is obviously nothing right about lying and gaining votes under false pretences. Imagine you're an alien in LEO flying in their little alien spacecraft and observing and studying human behaviour. They must immediately understand why we are not more developed than we actually are , but are shocked at the open display of stupidity by people who are in charge.

Maybe we should not vote for People but for Policy instead....


Joey