Fetterman in PA is another great example. He is running against Dr Oz, and goes to lengths to brand him (fairly) as an out of touch snake oil salesman who is not even from PA. He has done it relentlessly enough across all platforms, digital and real life that it’s at this point borderline trolling*. But it’s brilliant because it is defining the campaign on the grounds he wants. He is laying the groundwork that when the policy debate eventually breaks out people are going to be disinclined to like or believe in what Dr Oz has to say. People simple dont understand policy debates, and so if you want to make people agree with your policy make sure you’re the one in debate who is seen as more agreeable and honest.
*His best one was he paid Snookie, from Jersey Shore fame, to record a Cameo wishing New Jersey’s own Dr Oz good luck in the new job he was applying for and then plastered that Cameo everywhere he could 
Very surprising since most of his money comes from his family coal business.
The Panamanian hooker pics doing the trick? Now, about that Sinema crack smoking video…
The new third party idea is intriguing. I hope it gains traction because something needs to happen to break the current gridlock and dysfunction.
The fundamental problem with the idea is that it is centrist Democrats trying to build a coalition with centrist Republicans. Those Democrats have been getting everything they want from the Democratic Party except wins for the better part of a generation. Instead of their party’s left, they are trying to substitute disaffected support from Republican centrists, who seem to be nearly extinct and have not put up much of an electoral fight since 2008.
Throw in the difficulties of getting on state ballots, and I just don’t see much hope for it.
You are probably right, but I applaud the intent. America does need a third party, as the current system is gridlock and bad faith, but this iteration probably won’t gain the traction it needs.
Perhaps the future is for the Democrats to go further to the left, and to stop trying to be moderate, and reach across the aisle in good faith, when it is not reciprocated?
I’ve said a few times, but I see a future with the likes of AOC coming to the fore. In the next couple of years it looks to me like the Republicans will gain traction in the midterms and probably win the Whitehouse in 2024, and the Democrats will need to think about how they will come again.
By then the old guard should move on, and allow a new thing to emerge.
If a ballot card looks like this…
- Democrat
- Centrist
- Republican
Then unfortunately the Centrist party splits the vote of the Democrats and Republican wins nearly every single time.
Yang isnt a centrist. He’s an attention whore after a new mark.
I’m curious, is there any members in the State legislation or mayors outside the two parties? I know Bernie Sanders is actually an independent, but anyone else even at state-level?
There are a few, but a fairly small number and in a very limited number of states. Most states have significant barriers to other parties even getting on the ballot.
Sanders is from Vermont, which has some of the easiest access rules, and a long tradition of independent candidates. It is sort of indicative that Vermont might now have the highest number of independents in their state legislature of any state, despite the small population and number of legislators.
This is something very unique (and not in a good way) about USA. Although all democracies basically have a duopoly, there are a number of minor parties always maintaining presence even at national level.
For me, it’s a total mystery why people would content themselves with only two parties, instead of being represented by more diverse political parties, defending their respective positions and views.
Let’s say that I’m a US citizen, and have a strong position in favour of renewable energies, protection of natural spaces and general respect of nature. Whom will I turn to? The Democrats seem to have a little bit more sensitivity for these issues, but they are far from pushing an aggressive agenda in that regard from what I can gather. I’d probably vote for them just to avoid the Republicans, but wouldn’t feel genuinely represented by them.
If I’m in favour of a strong socialism for instance, I won’t feel that I’m represented by one of the two parties either. So, I’ll either vote for what I perceive as the lesser evil (with a deep sense of frustration), or I’ll stop voting entirely.
In my opinion, the more parties you have, the richer and subtler political life you’ll get, and the more democracy will come into play, as all parties will have to work out compromises in order to represent not only the biggest fraction of the population which brought one of the two parties into power, but also other minorities.
Institutions matter. Most of the systems with a multiplicity of parties either have selection mechanisms that will reward 2nd and 3rd place (etc.) finishers with some element of power, or strong cleavages (regional/ethnic/religious) that create distinct bases, or some combination thereof.
The US is notable for having institutions that reward only first place, and has evolved parties that really represent nothing expect a voter’s relative positioning against a binary in their area. Sixty years when the system was working in a relative sense, it was thoroughly understood that Southern Democrats were generally more conservative than most Northeastern Republicans.
That in turn creates some fairly ugly incentives for how those parties behave:
Democrats barenuckle Green Party off North Carolina ballot (msn.com)
Yeah, it’s unbelievable to see this kind of stuff. 
But again, most people seem to be content with this flawed system. They keep being told by the media that they live in the biggest democracy in the world, and that seems to be enough for them.
American political culture is weird, full of pride about being ‘free’, yet most meaningful attempts to quantify freedom comparatively find the US fairly mediocre. Some of those have used methods that are really economic distribution criticisms, but even ones that leave that aside generally place the US well outside the top 10 - and that was before American women lost bodily autonomy to the power of the state.
But…guns.
This was produced over a decade ago, and resonates even stronger now: