i think it's an idea everyone loves in theory, but when it comes time to actually vote, they would rather opt for someone who's more likely to represent more of their interests.
can an independent be more representative of their interests?
i know the difference between a centrist and an independent but aren't they similar btw? i keep using those two terms like they are the same.
It's not like everyone is left and right. But because of our first-past-the-post voting system, any number of political parties greater than two reduces the plurality by which the president wins. Meaning we could elect someone even crazier than Annoying Orange with only 29% of the vote. People realize this, and so third parties never really take off.
I would have liked Sanders to win the presidency, and technically there was nothing stopping me from voting for him. And obviously I didn't lol
i do understand that, i did say the US should be open to the spectrum in which yeah there is a third party option. however we could elect someone better (experienced, more reliable, etc) than Annoying Orange and not that crazy guy who thinks we should establish communism lol
i thought sanders was pretty okay and the free college is what sort of caught my eye before the election even happened. -who doesn't love to not be in debt when they enter college? i think this student debt thing is forgeted up when i hear it from friends who are in college- shame nobody talks of the lost candidates anymore