• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Survey of Unregistered & Unlikely Voters

myDeaconmyhand

myDeaconmyhand

First man to get a team of horses up Bear Mountain
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
39,918
Reaction score
9,797
Location
Winston
http://www.suffolk.edu/news/76774.php#.WuJwlMgh3BJ
Poll: Non-Voters Cite “Corrupt System” as Reason for Opting Out

"Nearly two-thirds of adult U.S. citizens will stay away from the polls during the coming midterm elections, and they say they have given up on the political parties and a system that they say is beyond reform and repair, according to a Suffolk University/USA Today nationwide survey of unregistered and unlikely voters.
A majority of those non-voters would like to see a third party or multiple parties.
As for their rationale, 68 percent of unregistered voters and registered-but-unlikely voters agreed with the statement: “I don’t pay much attention to politics because it is so corrupt.” That number is up sharply from a Suffolk University/USA TODAY survey of unregistered and unlikely voters taken in August 2012, when 54 percent agreed with that same statement about politics being “corrupt.”
Nearly 63 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “I don’t pay much attention to politics because nothing ever gets done – it’s a bunch of empty promises,” compared to 59 percent who said the same nearly six years ago.

Confidence in parties wanes

Twenty-two percent said the Democratic and Republican parties do a good job of representing Americans’ political views, down from 32 percent in 2012. And 57 percent said a third party or multiple parties are necessary. That’s up from 53 percent in the earlier poll, which took place shortly before President Barack Obama was elected to a second term.
Fourteen percent of the non-voters polled said that political gridlock in Washington is the number one problem facing the nation.  That’s up significantly from the Suffolk University/USA TODAY survey taken in the summer of 2012, when 8 percent of respondents felt political gridlock was the most important problem, behind the economy (27 percent), unemployment (20 percent) and health care (9 percent)..."
 
PhDeac said:
45% couldn't name or refused to name the Vice-President of the United States.
http://www.suffolk.edu/documents/SUPRC/4_23_2018_tables.pdf
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is what really grinds my gears. People just bitching that the government is too corrupt because they're too lazy to learn about even a fraction of it. It also doesn't help that the sitting president keeps talking about what a hell hole America and politics is...unfortunately, he's still one of the people who only understands a fraction of it.
 
Last edited:
Yep. People say they'd support a third party, but they can't tell you what the two major parties are up to much less any of the actual "third parties" that already exist.
 
Unless you make voting mandatory like they do in Australia, there is little that will significantly change regarding unregistered and unlikely voters.
 
PhDeac said:
Yep. People say they'd support a third party, but they can't tell you what the two major parties are up to much less any of the actual "third parties" that already exist.
Click to expand...

Then again, I can't tell what the Dems are up to other than Medicare for all and Russia. I may disagree with everything the Pubs stand for, but at least I know what it is.
 
palmab03 said:
Then again, I can't tell what the Dems are up to other than Medicare for all and Russia. I may disagree with everything the Pubs stand for, but at least I know what it is.
Click to expand...

Seems like in order to know what the Republicans stand for (opposing everything the Democrats stand for) you would have to know what the Dems are "up to."
 
WakeForestRanger said:
Unless you make voting mandatory like they do in Australia, there is little that will significantly change regarding unregistered and unlikely voters.
Click to expand...

I previously dug into the numbers from Virginia in 2017 (gubernatorial) and 2016 (presidential) compared to 2009 and 2008. In 2009 about 53% of the voters showed up compared to 2008. In 2017 66% of the voters showed up compared to 2016.

Now sure, you expect the voters of the party not in power to show up. But the numbers on the right barely changed, so they were still voting (66% in 2017 compared to 67% in 2009.) The change was entirely on the left.

I don't think it is a coincidence that left-leaning people are not only motivated to vote, but to run for office, volunteer, canvass, phone bank, send texts, write to voters, etc.

We can get more people to vote by running everywhere and showing up where non-voters are to make an argument.

Also fighting voter disenfranchisement and voter suppression.
 
Although they certainly have their own issues (such as the need to often create creaky and unstable "coalition" governments when no party can gain a clear majority), a multiparty system, which already exists in most other democracies, may be worth trying here, given the increasing dysfunction of the current two-party system. Having said that, a huge obstacle to a multiparty system in the US is the Electoral College. It would be virtually impossible for a third party to get the 270 electoral votes needed to win. In that case the election would go into the House of Representatives, where the two major parties would have an enormous edge. Abolishing or fixing the electoral college would go a long way towards making serious third-party candidates more viable. I don't see that happening anytime soon, though, at least as long as the GOP is in charge.
 
Highland Deac said:
Although they certainly have their own issues (such as the need to often create creaky and unstable "coalition" governments when no party can gain a clear majority), a multiparty system, which already exists in most other democracies, may be worth trying here, given the increasing dysfunction of the current two-party system. Having said that, a huge obstacle to a multiparty system in the US is the Electoral College. It would be virtually impossible for a third party to get the 270 electoral votes needed to win. In that case the election would go into the House of Representatives, where the two major parties would have an enormous edge. Abolishing or fixing the electoral college would go a long way towards making serious third-party candidates more viable. I don't see that happening anytime soon, though, at least as long as the GOP is in charge.
Click to expand...

What would that coalition look like? When it comes down to it, people are remarkably flexible in adjusting their politics to the Democratic and Republican parties. Perhaps people on the fringes would be likely to drop off, but we're still talking about a small fraction of the electorate. At the end of the day and based on the research that I've seen, most people fashion themselves two party pragmatists and vote party line.

That said, I would be on board for the following slate of parties in a coalition government:

Democratic Socialists of America Party
Democratic Party
Republican Party
Social Conservative Party
Libertarian Party
Green Party
 
Strickland33 said:
What would that coalition look like? When it comes down to it, people are remarkably flexible in adjusting their politics to the Democratic and Republican parties. Perhaps people on the fringes would be likely to drop off, but we're still talking about a small fraction of the electorate. At the end of the day and based on the research that I've seen, most people fashion themselves two party pragmatists and vote party line.

That said, I would be on board for the following slate of parties in a coalition government:

Democratic Socialists of America Party
Democratic Party
Republican Party
Social Conservative Party
Libertarian Party
Green Party
Click to expand...

In normal times I think voters would stick to the two main parties, but I get the sense that disgust and frustration has reached the point that a significant minority would be open to a multiparty system if it appeared to be a viable alternative. Both the UK and Australia have two major parties, but there are numerous smaller parties that are able to win substantial numbers of seats in the parliament and regional and local races, from the Liberal Democrats in the UK (and Greens and others), to the National Party and Green Party in Australia. I have no idea if a multiparty system would be workable here, or would work better than what we currently have, but I do think more voters would be open to it if it were viable. With the Electoral College, gerrymandering, and other current obstacles, though, I don't see it happening anytime soon.
 
WakeForestRanger said:
Unless you make voting mandatory like they do in Australia, there is little that will significantly change regarding unregistered and unlikely voters.
Click to expand...

Can't support a true Idiocracy or a true Democracy fwiw. Both appear synonymous these days.

ETA: I use the word "true" because that's what I've been hearing. "Hillary won the 'true' vote," for example. Hilarious and disgusting at the same time, but mostly hilarious.
 
Last edited:
I’ve literally never heard anyone say Hillary won the “true vote.” I have heard people say she won the popular vote.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Seems like in order to know what the Republicans stand for (opposing everything the Democrats stand for) you would have to know what the Dems are "up to."
Click to expand...

tenor.gif
 
I’ll put this here:

John McCain Makes An Appeal For Civility And Humility

Quote
—————
...He ticks through several political reforms that could make things better — namely getting rid of the practice of gerrymandering and a more open campaign finance system that gets dark money — money that can't be traced back to a donor — out of politics.

But it's going to take more than that, McCain notes:

"As always, more important than any political reforms is the discernment of voters. Here's my unsolicited advice to the American voter: If a candidate for Congress pledges to ride his white horse to Washington and lay waste to all the scoundrels living off your taxes, to never work or socialize or compromise with any of them, and then somehow get them to bow to your will and the superiority of your ideas, don't vote for that guy. It sounds exciting, but it's an empty boast and a commitment to more gridlock."

Support, instead, candidates who want to get things done:

"Yes, I'd rather have a few more problem solvers than purists in Washington. Their zeal may be commendable, but not, as it usually happens, terribly productive."

More broadly, he writes that Americans need to realize that people of other parties can be good people:

"We need to recover some perspective about how much someone's politics is a testament to their character. When did politics become the principal or only attribute we use to judge people? Republicans and Democrats can be good neighbors, loving parents, loyal Americans, decent human beings. I don't remember another time in my life when so many Americans considered someone's partisan affiliation a test of whether that person was entitled to their respect."
—————
 
When was the last time John McCain's Republicans got anything done besides give big fucking tax breaks and roll back regulation? Of course that asshole would complain about gridlock, his own party has a majority and keep stepping on their own dick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top