Sixty-three percent of Americans say a third U.S. political party is needed, up from 56% a year ago and by one percentage point the highest in Gallup's 20-year trend.

Story Highlights

  • Third time support has exceeded 60%, along with 2017 and 2021
  • Republicans primarily behind the increase, with 58% now in favor
  • Political independents remain group most likely to favor third party
      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        381·
        1 year ago

        What if we just took all the leftist policies that Republican voters say they love in polls, but just replaced their names with new names that Fox News hasn’t had a chance to program their viewers on? Instead of Universal Healthcare, we’ll call it the American Bodily Integrity Defense Initiative or patriot care or some shit. No, no, it’s not high speed rail, it’s the Uncle Sam Express. No, no, it’s not universal college, it’s the “Beating China By Investing in Education Strategic Defense Initiative”. Etc.

            • utopianfiat@lemmy.worldEnglish
              4·
              1 year ago

              The humor is definitely appreciated 😂

              The political realities unfortunately are that a lot of our systems are not designed as lassiez-faire capitalist ideological manifestations but socialist for a white anglo-saxon colonizer nation (one might say, national-socialist) which often implies delegating the discrimination through proxies like corporate employment or residence in neighborhoods of a certain character.

        • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
          62·
          1 year ago

          The problem is the corporate centrists would and often do ally with the Unrepentant Nazis when the owners bribe them both and give them their marching orders on economic policy.

          The supposed “voice of sanity” corporate centrists would literally rather have Nazi Germany than universal healthcare or a UBI. It’s a better outcome for corporate profitability.

          Neoliberals dislike Republicans, but both they and Republicans loathe leftists/progressives. Probably because neoliberals and Republicans have had a quiet agreement since Reagan to bicker on social issues but do what they’re bribed to do on economic policy, while progressives understand our current, rigged economic structure to be the root cause of most of our many crises.

          Neolibs and Repubs just want to play fight about social wedges while they drink from that unlimited gravy train plugged directly into their PACs. They both consider it their higher duty to undermine any economic extremists trying to legislate a more equitable society. That’s the opposite of what the owners that pay any willing federal Democrat or Republican to play ball want.

        • Billiam@lemmy.world
          118·
          1 year ago

          You said “Democrats” twice.

          Edit: man, I can’t figure out who this pissed off- people who don’t know progressives and corporate centrists are in the Democratic party, or Republicans.

        • GoodbyeBlueMonday@startrek.websiteEnglish
          3·
          1 year ago

          A quote I think about a lot is one by Susan Sontag, and I think it maps pretty well to what you’ve laid out (just obviously not in that same order!). "10 percent of any population is cruel, no matter what, and 10 percent is merciful, no matter what, and the remaining 80 percent can be moved in either direction.”

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldEnglish
        72·
        1 year ago

        Something that is not “too extreme” - something that strikes a compromise with fascists that want to kill fellow citizens for merely existing (gays, trans, POC, etc.) or disagreeing with them and people that support the Constitution and civil rights and institutional norms. Because that second group is just so extreme.

      • killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
        31·
        1 year ago

        I like the idea of Schrödinger’s party. It’s either hard left or hard right but, like a mystery prize on a shitty gameshow, you won’t find out until after the votes are placed.

    • synae[he/him]@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      4·
      1 year ago

      Do people think “third party” literally means one and only one additional party? Or am I getting wooshed

      In case anyone does think that… It does not

    • kromem@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      How about a data driven platform determined solely by what gets at least 65% majority support in two or more national polls?

      Given political preferences tend to fall along a normal distribution curve, rather than drawing a line in the middle and catering to two parties necessarily based by the split toward less popular ends, it would make more sense to focus on two std deviations from the norm and ignore the extremes of each side, leaving it up to national discourse to move the median in one direction or the other and have representatives literally just represent whatever the majority holds.