this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
12 points (87.5% liked)

Progressive Politics

3051 readers
123 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
12
Could a popular shadow primary usurp FPTP voting? (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by blf@lemmy.world to c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The flaws of FPTP voting are generally well known at this point. Extremely popular policies are given no platform in the US two party system. But could a grassroots network of vote compacts negate the spoiler effect?

A big-tent psuedo-party could hold a parallel primary before elections, agreeing to use all votes for a candidate if a critical threshold is reached. A green light candidate would need 51% (+ X% margin) of internal votes and ~40% of total election votes (varying by historical election turnout). Otherwise the voters default to least evil of the two party system.

The first question is legality, which I have no clue on. However, political parties are built on the idea of shared voting power, so I don't see how any argument against this scheme would make sense.

The second question would be logistics. Validating public voter identities is easy enough, but there would need to be a system of representative conventions to maintain trust. A local group proving unity by winning a local election would grant them access to a higher tier, up to the national level.

Obviously there are more complexities in reality (eg: the US electoral college, real life voter loyalty, etc...), but could it work?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

I think this would rely on community activism; in America today most activism is internet based, and not neighborhood oriented.

So, I think this has happened before, but not since the collapse of local community politics in the 1980s; but someone more knowledgeable of history could probably find examples from the 1970s and 1960s or earlier.

it’s a great idea and definitely could be used as a stop gap; and I hope to see it used later as community activism gets a reboot later.

But if it can work before then, that would be great