Why Do Americans Keep Voting for Republicans and Democrats? Are They Stupid?

Perhaps it does in fact take an at least somewhat flawed person to want to run for office... but surely we can at least try to mitigate things and work to make it so that the people who represent us are not... among the most flawed out of the bunch... You are right in suggesting that our current system seems to promote corruption...so... Let's Change the System!... Let's improve things to the extent that we can such that corruption becomes less prevalent, that disliked politicians do not perpetually remain in office, that the more virtuous individuals among us are more encouraged to run for office - and win!

Like you said, under the current system, moderates, independents, and third-party candidates generally do not have realistic chances of winning. That is part of the problem, because more often than not their dismal prospects are not strictly due to a rejection of their policies or doubts about their competency to lead (though that can come into play on occasion), rather it is our Plurality Election Systems which give the two "main" parties an unfair advantage, to the detriment of everyone else, including the general electorate.

If a voter likes a third-party candidate (C), today when they go into that voting booth under our current system they have to think to themselves: Hmm, yeah I really like candidate C here, I even think they'd do the best job, but candidates A and B from the main parties over here are way more popular with others I think, and I really really REALLY hate candidate B... do I really want to give my vote to C instead of to A who may have a better chance at beating B?

Some say such a conflicted voter should vote "their heart", and pick the candidate they want most (C in this case), many however would refer to that as a wasted vote, or to put it more kindly, a protest vote, one meant to send a message rather than actually having an impact on the outcome... And in truth, while we complain endlessly about candidates from the two "main" parties, it could actually be the case that much better candidates exist somewhere in between those two major parties, or perhaps somewhere completely outside of the left-right spectrum... but in practice, voting for such candidates, as the term "protest vote" implies, is really no more effective than one who doesn't vote at all. This sort of thinking is where the concept of spoiler candidates comes into play, and not only affects how people vote, but also who runs to begin with.

The alternative would be for the voter to vote with "their brain", aka voting for the lesser evil. Voters assume that some candidates, usually the ones from the main parties, are more popular and have a better shot at winning due to their main party candidate status... not an inaccurate assumption, however voters cannot really know how every other voter will vote, it could be a third party candidate is truly the most popular, but if voters think they can't win, then that thought becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as it only takes a few voters going the other way to sink a candidacy, especially in close races. So this second group of voters essentially votes for the person they think is most likely to beat their least favorite candidate rather than for who they actually like, seems logical in the short-term, but over time such lesser evil candidates become increasingly more evil, especially to "the other side", as cycle to cycle voters compromise more and more on their genuinely held convictions and eventually sacrificing their principals completely in an evermore desperate effort to beat their opposition to prevent and or in retaliation for that opposition foisting their so-called lesser evil on the country as a whole.

The above, basically, is a vicious cycle which will get worse over time if left to continue on without interruption. Its easy to blame the voters, but they should not be held more at fault than the election system itself when neither choice the voter is afforded leads to a favorable outcome. The system itself is unfair to the voters... vote your heart or vote your brain??? The very idea that one would be forced to choose between the two in such a way is an affront to true democracy. A voter should be allowed to vote with both their heart and their brain without consequence! Voting for the candidate you like the most should never increase the chances of the candidate you like least winning. At least that's how things would be if the system was fair...

As for solutions...
I mentioned Instant Runoff, Ranked Pairs, and Gerrymandering Solutions in a previous post.
On the subject of Corruption specifically, I think that several good ideas came out of the following thread:
What to do to Stop Back-room Dealing in Politics

-Meta

 

The problem here is that our current system fosters stark binary division rather than collective compromise. Under our current system, if you stick strictly to a set of principles other than the set that says, win at any cost, you'll likely lose! And obviously winning at any cost leads even generally good people into disavowing their beliefs or skirting the rules of decency,... whatever makes it more likely for them to beat their opposition,... especially as "the sides" continually strive to one-up each-other. Its no wonder that things go downhill in such an environment.

And the voters, due to our Plurality Election Systems, are left little recourse to fix this directly. Essentially, both voters and politicians alike are forced to lie to others and to themselves about what they truly believe and or view as fair, all in order to win. Politicians no longer compromise with each-other on our behalf, instead they compromise on the truth. This needs to be flipped, and we should have a system that reflects a desire for preferences to be conveyed clearly without tactical manipulation, and one which effectively allows for compromise in areas were views diverge.

-Meta

 

What you say makes sense, but I think we have to be a bit more specific if we actually want to resolve things. What exactly does it mean for one to vote on principle? Does it mean voting for a candidate you like even if they aren't part of one the "main" two parties? Due to the spoiler effect, simply attempting to vote for a third party candidate or independent likely wont be enough to change anything. In my opinion, what needs to happen here is that we first need to focus on fixing the system. We can start by simply talking more about what aspects of the system are actually causing the problem, as I don't think many people today are familiar with the issues surrounding Plurality voting for instance nor with the potential alternatives. So let's discuss it. Let's get the media to discuss it. Let's convince our elected officials to start supporting the fixes. Let's convince prospective candidates too, and vote for the ones who credibly commit to reforms. Fix the system that perpetuates these issues, and then worry about the rest as dealing with it will be much easier at that point...

-Meta

 

When a person is put into a lose-lose-lose situation...
I don't think its fair to call them hypocritical when they, predictably, choose an option that means that they lose...
We ought to improve our system such that folks do not ever feel pressured to choose between lowering their standards
or sending an ultimately inconsequential "message". People should be able to vote for who they want/who they think is the best person for the job, and not feel like they increased an opposing candidate's chance of winning in the process. There are methods available that would allow us to achieve this, and we ought to be seriously considering them.

-Meta

 

It doesn't say anything good, that's for sure. But I believe that over time, even if we have some OK ones here and there, the average quality of candidates will continue to deteriorate if we allow things to keep going as they have.

Its way past time that we committed to changing things for the better. Let us all acknowledge that our current system served us well for a time as a starting point, particularly in the times where we agreed on more than we disagreed,... but that now it has expended its usefulness in its current form, and that it is time for things to evolve for the good of the country.

Today, we need a system which can more accurately represent the desires of the electorate.
Is there any reason at all for why we should not move to such a system as soon as possible?

-Meta

 

^This. Although the original Plurality system as set up by the founders was itself unfair to 3rd parties.
Can't blame them too much though, as democracy in general was a fairly new concept back then.
Now however, we know better. And yet we the people have yet to do anything about it,
even as the current parties have worked to further exacerbate the issue...

It's high time that Americans become more educated on this, and start demanding change!

-Meta

 

Dump FPP Plurality Voting and institute a Ranked Voting system in its place!...

-Meta

 

What is your opinion on Ranked Voting methods like Instant Runoff and Ranked Pairs?

-Meta

 

Didn't Ross Perot lose the 1992 election by a wide margin while also likely contributing significantly to Bush losing to Clinton?

-Meta

 

Calling them stupid doesn't solve the problem though, does it?
If they're stupid, then those of us in the know need to educate them.
Like I said before, we need to start talking more about the systemic factors which are perpetuating these issues.
We need to start talking more about the various improvements that can be made to our system to fix the issues.
We need to tell our friends, our family, our coworkers. We need to get the media talking about this.
We need to convince our elected leaders to support implementation of these changes, and
we need to support candidates who make this a priority once they come onto the scene.

So voting is a part of the solution here, but there's more to it than that...

-Meta

 

I think you may have quoted the wrong person.
Also, what you described is what I refereed to as the spoiler effect.
It is a flaw in our election systems which really needs to be fixed.
A person should never be forced to choose between voting for who they like and who they think can win.
But under our current system that is exactly what happens...

-Meta