Lets be honest: both parties fucking suck in America. Maybe you like one more than the other, but even "your team" lets a bunch of shit slide or you are forced to accept parts of the platform you don't agree with to get the parts you want. MAGA is crazy, the Dems are incompetent, both are probably on the Epstein list. No one is happy with the status quo.

So why not make a third party? Its difficult, sure, but it has been done before. The idea that the current two parties are immutable and you HAVE to pick from them is a useful lie perpetuated by those same parties. We can ditch them any time we want, we just have to get enough people to agree to it.

To that end, a thought experiment: what would the platform of a third party option need to be to actually capitalize on the zeitgeist of the modern era and capture the hearts and minds of people who are fed up the current two parties? We have to ignore the existing categories and right and left for this one, and instead focus on what the core issues that people care about are, and what sorts of solutions would need to be offered that would not only get people voted into office but actually be actionable and let them stay in power once they have proven their ideas can work? Its also important that we start with the problems and then work towards solutions, not just emotionally skipping to the solution you want without the proper foundation to support it.

I firmly believe that the problems we face in America can be solved, I just don't think that the Republicans or the Democrats are the people capable of solving them. So lets figure out what a real solution would have to look like.

>>510565789 (OP)
Look just b4 we could make the trans party

What do we call it? This is of utmost importance

>>510565789 (OP)
Yeah, go vote for nerdy, off-putting, anti-nature technocrats (elon musk).

>>510565868
The 99%. Let them lose their shit all over again like they did after Occupy Wall Street.

>>510565868
You figure out the platform first, and then come up with a label that describes that platform. Coming up with the branding ahead of time is some dumb shit, thats how you end up with stuff like Elon's "America Party" which tells you fucking NOTHING and is just the blandest thing ever.

>>510565868
The not pill.
You shouldn't have to rely on pharmacope allegories to wake up.

>>510565789 (OP)
If we got 75% of America to vote for a third party, the electoral college would change the vote.

If we replaced the electoral college with third-party members, the third-party president would not have the support of anyone else.

I'd offer an example of progress that happened when all 3 branches are controlled by a third party, but it will never, ever happen unless that representative is bought and sold by corporations or foreign interests.

Nothing will change without rivers of 1% blood.

>>510565789 (OP)
why are you so desperate for the democrats to have power? You should trust that Trump knows what he’s doing

>>510565997
The only thing the 99% wields is numbers. We'd lose billions of us taking out the mere thousands that keep us struggling.

>>510565997
But are you gonna actually let black and hispanic Americans in? Otherwise it's not 99% (These groups count as actual Americans unlike Arabs and jeets)

>>510566313
why do you support pedophiles?

>>510565789 (OP)
No, the third option is to hang politicians and media members from lamposts.

>>510565868
The Party of Anti Israel. The people's party.

>>510566357
>let them in

Yes. Not unvetted Haitians or people claiming to be refugees from poverty. Only vetted immigrants.

>>510565789 (OP)
Something we should have figured out 2 centuries ago
We didn't
This simulation will be stopping soon

>>510566313
True democrats believe that the democratic party is the party of the people, mainly because they're not paying attention. They don't understand what happens, almost ever. A true democrat will vote for democrats because they believe that the only way for the little guy to advance is to elect a real people's advocate. True democrats are blind, as are true republicans. The stated philosophies are just there to gain fans. They're the same people subjugating the same people and advancing the same people. If a true revolutionary republican came to power and started fixing things, the true democrat still complains, because no republican can ever do good.

>>510565789 (OP)
Personally, I think the core idea to focus on is an 'America for the people' vibe, with the focus being the greatest prosperity for the greatest number of people. The choice shouldn't be between 'have a good economy' and 'have good social programs', it should be "have an economy thats good enough that you can afford to have good social programs".
The whole mindset of being angry that other people are getting benefits you don't think they deserve is an expression akin to dogs fighting over scraps. It inherently indicates a critical scarcity, that THEM getting something means YOU might not have enough. For a country as great and wealthy as America is supposed to be, that type of fighting for scraps should be beneath us. The fact that it isn't is the clearest indicator that something has gone very wrong, and needs to be fixed. If Wall Street is doing so great, why are we all so goddamn poor?

I'd also say its worth focusing on political reform that restores power and voice to the american people, as opposed to foriegn powers and special interests. In the bus era it was all about corporation owning politicians. Post-2016 is was Russian shills. Now its Israel. The specific boogeyman buying up political influence in our government no longer matters, the fact that we allow it to happen *at all* needs to be throttled. That means major campaign finance reform, at the very least.

>>510566357
>immigrants
Black people have lived here for 300 years chud

>>510566533
I'd vote for this.

>>510566735
Meant to reply to this retard >>510566664
Not my retarded self

>>510566801
It's not a black thing. Jesus Christ, what part of 99% do you not understand?

>>510566730
An America for the people would have to start with revolution and slaughter of at least the top .5%

>>510565789 (OP)
>both parties
what about the green party, the libertarian party, the constitution party...

>>510565789 (OP)
It's an absolute certainty that a third party will form, made up of members of the existing two parties who agree on some subject that the leaders of the others ignore.

If you are serious about this subject, I would refer you to a book called "Conspectus of the History of Political Parties and the Federal Government". Written in 1880; it gives a detailed history of all the parties in the US; focusing on the issues which caused the various joining and splitting of various parties. You can read/download it for free here:
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Conspectus_of_the_History_of_Political_P/7dNDAQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0

Especially important is this chart, which went along with the book, but is far too large to be able to post here. It's a short graphic version of the same information; showing the rise and fall of the various parties:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conspectus_of_the_history_of_political_parties_and_the_federal_government_-_Diagram_of_the_Rise_and_Fall_of_American_Political_Parties.jpg

>>510566910
It would certain be a party that is aligned against the top 1% and their interests, in large part because the top 1% have already invested in control over the current parties and thats in large part what got us into this mess in the first place. Only by outright rejecting them from the start can we hope to keep them from worming their way in to the party.

>>510565789 (OP)
Will never happen until you start murdering lobbyists.
They are.preventing 3rd parties from being formalized legally because the owners of this country want you to keep playing the 2 party system. This helps to create mistrust and cynicism among voters to the point they don't vote. Things will get so bad, Americans will beg for a complete corporate take over of our government as if they haven't already. Rooftop voting is the only true voice of dissatisfaction with the elites. Want a bill pass? Find the lobbyist who is giving your representative or senator money to vote against it and put a bullet right between his/her eyes

I don't think america can be fixed by voting

Trump was the last gasp of democracy in America. The last chance the democratic system could probe that yes, in fact, voting does change things.

As we see today, no it doesn't. You only get real change with violence, as it has always been. I can't imagine America would be in a worse place than it is right now had it been founded as a monarchy rather than a democracy.

>>510567127
It has to be an anti-jew party or it will just be the same shit all over again. I say we ditch all existing members from both sides and start over, no AIPAC no jew funding, completely cut them off.

>>510565789 (OP)
>Ranked Choice Voting
>Mandatory College, Technical School, Military or Community Service upon reaching adulthood
>Eliminate minimum wage and establish maximum wage with UBI system for all US citizens, including Mr Gates and Mr Tesla
>50% inheritance tax
>Establish a silver standard for money and restructure the debt favorably under that new standard

>>510565868
WIGGERS

>>510567047
All irrelevant, sadly. Not just in numbers, but in scope. They are too dedicate to singular issues (like the green party) or on pushing a specific political POV that is just as old and ourdated as the Dems or GOP are. Most of the parties are older than I am, and none of them have anything new to offer or say. The past cannot save us, if it could it would have done so already.

from a country that has about 56 political parties i can tell you, it's all about splitting the vote and the buying of preferences.
there is no political solution

>>510567376
Or a mass revolt against voting in general. If the people refuse to vote at all this will shake things up, and they will realize just how little power they have over us.

>>510565789 (OP)
I'll make a party when your tranny son necks.

>>510567378
New type of Oligarchy worse than anything Russians could come up with isin the works and it's right under most Americans noses.

>>510567215
I've been saying that people who gain wealth and influence need to be purged for a long time. I don't care if they get rich and fuck off to an island somewhere, but when they threaten my freedoms to cement their power, they need to be burned at the stake. Any politician found to be influenced by wealth needs to be burned at the stake. Anyone who attempts to control politicians with wealth needs to be burned at the stake. No more tolerance, no mercy. Freedom isn't there for the wealthiest man to take away. It needs to be met with prolonged agony and death.

>>510567376
only blood will solve this

>>510567711
No. Making it even easier for your voice to be ignored helps no one.
No one has ever survived in deep water by saying "I guess struggling doesn't matter" and letting themselves sink.
SWIM motherfucker. Kick those feet.

>>510567453
> Ranked choice voting is a scam; designed to push out outsider candidates
> 50% inheritance tax is outright theft
> going to a gold/silver standard would mean that the only countries who could create new wealth are those with unmined metal. So in the case of silver, that means turning over world economic power to Peru, Bolivia, and Kazakhstan

>>510568141
Understandable sentiment, but I think we can get 99% of what we want simply by cutting them out of the campaign finance game and actually enforcing the taxes they owe us on them. Break up the big trusts, dismantle some exploitative industries that extract debt from people for no actual benefit (like health insurance) and so on.

You'll have a much easier time getting the majority of americans on board with a nonviolent platform that punishes the rich for decades of shitty practices than you will getting that same number of americans on board with mass violence. Hopefully. If the reverse is true, we really ARE fucked.

>>510568387
>Ranked choice voting is a scam; designed to push out outsider candidates
How does that even make sense? What outsider candidates even exist *without* it?
Ranked choice voting is what lets you vote with your conscience even if you don;t know for sure they can win, without it you risk throwing your vote away.

> 50% inheritance tax is outright theft
The massive wealth transfer to the 10% was *already* theft. This is just taking some of that back when they die.
Also, 50% is nothing. From 1930s to 1970s it was literally 70% or higher (the highest was 77%) on estates of more than 10 million dollars. It was only dropped to 50% in the 1980s, and and now its down in the 30s percent wise but there are dozens of ways to duck having to pay it.
50% take rate would be a very reasonable return to common sense tax rates, and nowhere near what it was during some of our most financially prosperous years as a nation.

>>510568230
Your voice is being ignored whether you vote or not. Do you not see this? Do you not see how jews run both parties? And no matter which side you vote for you're getting more jewish shit?

>>510569111
Which is why we need a third party. If we can't trust them to fix problems, we have to do it ourselves.

>>510568534
I want mass violence now, though.
It's been too long. I was already in my 20s when 9/11 was committed by Israel. I'm sick of this shit. I've watched it unfold for half a century now, and the people stay stupid and the rich get richer. It's infuriating.

>>510569197
But that party isn't going to amount to dick unless you ban jews from joining. This is why I suggested a mass revolt against voting first, the people refusing to vote for or be ruled by jews.

>>510568889
No, ranked choice is a way to confuse the voters into thinking that they still have a choice.

Those who promote a heavy inheritance tax are basically saying this:
> it's unfair that you should be able to leave a little extra money to your kids; when others didn't save enough money to leave to their kids.

It's the old communist line about no one having a fur coat until everyone has a good cloth coat. The basic theory is that hard work, saving, and smart decisions should be punished, and their money should be given to those who make bad decisions and can't save.

Yes, there are people who have unheard of wealth; and their children get a free pass in life; but even those fortunes mostly come from the ability of some distant ancestor to work smarter or harder than the next guy.

Morally justifying theft is wrong, even when you try to wrap it in faux altruism

>>510565789 (OP)
The best option is to get rid of parties altogether.

>>510568534
Or you can just murder the criminal lobbyists who are using loopholes to hand bags of money to politicians. Nobody is going to close ranks if some scumbag lobbyists takes a shot to the head, but shoot a politician or even a high valued CEO and watch how quickly security entennas go up. Honestly, follow the fucking money.

>>510565789 (OP)
There's no political solution. A third party just gets infiltrated and splintered from within. You don't have enough money to play the game. The answer is revolution and hot conflict whether you like it or not.

>>510565789 (OP)
The Tea Party tried it, Libertarians tried it, Green party has been trying (lolberts too) and who's that weirdo who wears a rain boot on his head and calls himself Vermin Supreme (it's kinda quite funny when you forget about him every four years and he pops up, I applaud his candor) and Heaven only knows how many more.

>>510569358
And ranked voting is a scam because it will often result in people who don't receive the most votes being declared the winner of the election

>>510569397
It would be nice, but I don't see a way that it would be practical. You can't *prevent* people from working together or making deals to vote the same way on certain topics, and when it comes down to it those two things will always snowball into at the very least informal parties.

The only system I can think of where political parties functionally could not exist was if congress was handled as a sort of jury-duty system.
The year is 2032. You get a letter in the mail. As a citizen of the united states with no felonies, you have been randomly selected by lottery to be a candidate for your district, alongside 9 other randomly selected people. Come November, the people will have to pick from among you 10 people, and the best of you gets to go to washington DC and be a congressman for the next two years.
You may feel out of your depth here. Thats fine. Thats normal. There will be a political cabinet you are inheriting from the last guy who help your office who understands the system and their job is to help you navigate it, but you can replace them at any time and ultimately you have the voting power on legislation, not them.

Essentially, your congress would be a constantly rotating random slice of americans from across the country. With the hope being that the voting process weeds out the worst ones and promotes forward the people who have an idea what they are doing with the opportunity.

It probably wouldn't work in practice for a hundred reasons, but it would make political parties largely impossible as anything other than extremely temproary alliances.

>>510565789 (OP)
A viable third party in the US will never happen without the structure being overturned. The country is operated by two corporations on behalf of Israel and that it how it will remain for the foreseeable future. Don’t like it? Pray for famine.

>>510569358
What is your alternative to ranked choice?
and heavy flat universal inheritance tax is justified as long as we have a debt based system, should be mandatory for all US citizens upon their passing away, for financial assets: stocks, bonds, funds, bank accounts. Not on their primary unmortgaged residence or their vitamix blender or their paintings.

>>510570195
see >>510570085 and understand that I see it as people saying:
> hey, I've got a great idea, what if we go with the person who gets less votes; and do it by a confusing math equation.
The solution is what we have.. where the person who gets the most votes is the winner.

And I find your approach to inheritance not just socialist/communist; but almost an anti-life approach; where the solution to an individuals' problem is to make everyone else as miserable as they are.

You work hard all your life. You save, because you never know if you will get sick and have to stop working. So you live cheap, you work hard, and you live a reasonably comfortable life.

Your goal is to help your kids, the blood of your blood and your favorite people in the world. You don't tell them, but you set aside a little money in an account, and you hope that the money will help them along a little in their life.

And then some noone from nowhere comes along and says "no, that's unfair. you have no right to leave anything to your kids unless you leave a little to me too".

George Carlin told the Truth years ago
https://youtu.be/guQw3nSkXMY?si=B7shQpk21ZygjzTn
Doubt any of you listened then and I doubt any of you listen now

I'm telling you all this, it was no mistake Elons little romp in the white house was affectionately called Doge.
Look up that word if you get a chance.
Also, if you take their money away, politicians are forced to listen to those who put them in office rather than who fucking paid for it.

>>510570902
I genuinely do not think you understand what ranked choice voting is or how it works. You end up with a larger majority under ranked choice than the current plurality necessary in a direct vote comparison. Its the system for MAXIMIZING number of voters happy with the outcome.

>>510571942
You think voting works still

>>510565789 (OP)
I got your third party

>>510571942
And you don't understand that elections aren't supposed to be about forming a coalition, a plurality, or some party-favoring new system.
> one man, one vote; and the person who gets the most votes is the winner.

Meanwhile, other than "we keep losing elections", I have yet to see one reasonable argument in favor of ranked voting; at least one that justifies overturning not only the social compact but the way voting has occurred (both in and out of politics) since humans climbed down from the trees.

>>510572020
Of course voting still works. I'm an around-town guy in local/regional politics; and you'd be surprised how many careers have been made/broken by just a handful of votes.