How complicated would it be to fundamentally change US voting laws?

[Proteus_MST]

Given that the Nazis had 30+ percent and the hardline parties are easily over 5 already in Germany, how does a 5 percent threshold prevent them from attaining power? US can't be governed by a small party with the balance of power, but rather a much broader coalition in the Republican party.

To the contrary.
With the Winner takes all system the USA are even more in danger of getting governed by a party with aminority of voteds, than germany.

I actually laid out how this is possible in my OP:
The CDU is the strongest power in Hessen, with 27% of the votes (which, in the german system means that she has to form coalitions with other parties in order to get over 50% in the state parliament)

With the US system however it is very well possible that the CDU would get 100% of the parliamentary seats despite only having 27% of the votes.
For this, we just have to assume that the results in the state election (i.e. 27% of the votes and strongest party) reflect the results in every single voting district.
Et voila, the CDU wins every district and has 100% of the parliamentary seats ... despite the fact that only 27% of the voters voted for the CDU.

Not to forget that the winner takes all system opens the door to voting manipulations, like the Gerrymandering, which plagues many states, especially those led by the GOP.

Also I have to say that it is very strange to claim something like a "broader coalition in the republican party" as countermeasure against fascism in the USA.
IMHO the Trump government shows very well how little of a protection the broad spectrum of both parties (Dems and Reps) offers.
The republican senators do Trumps bidding ... the majority of the representatives does Trumps bidding ... and those few that didn't obey Trump (like McCain) were effectively demeaned by Donnie. It seems to me like on a federal level the moderates in the GOP have been effectively silenced and the extremists in the GOP have taken over the helm.

The GOP by now effectively has become the Trump party, now more no less (at least on a federal level)
(and he harm it does will last for a generation)

(in the german multi party system on the other hand, almost always the majority party has to do formal coalition negotiations with one or 2 other parties in order to gain more than 50% in the partliament ... that means, a coalition treaty is set up in which it is formalized what ministries go to which party and also roughly outlined which stances the coalition government will have towards several topics. This way there is less danger (than in the factual US 2 party system), that a part of the ruling party/parties is just kept silenced and the extremist minority takes control ... if any of the parties violates the coalition treaty, the other party/parties can just decide that the treaty is void and the coalition breaks away (enforcing either new coalition negotiations, or even completely new elections))

[spambot]

Trump would never be president without the 2 party system, lol

[Proteus_MST]

Trump would never be president without the 2 party system, lol

.... or if the PotUS would be determined by popular vote and not by the antiquated electoral college

[Dinner]

All true but since reality is still real...

[Aeson]

Yes. Which is very different from the current system in Germany.

More different than the US system, and in regard to the main topic of this thread, very similar.

[Ben Kenobi]

With the Winner takes all system the USA are even more in danger of getting governed by a party with aminority of voteds, than germany.

I would contest that. For all the vitriol over Trump, he got 49 percent of the electorate. Hitler only needed 32 percent to dominate Germany. When was the last time any party in Germany got 40+ percent of the vote?

The CDU is the strongest power in Hessen, with 27% of the votes (which, in the german system means that she has to form coalitions with other parties in order to get over 50% in the state parliament)

Which should concern you greatly because Hitler managed to attain that threshold.

With the US system however it is very well possible that the CDU would get 100% of the parliamentary seats despite only having 27% of the votes.

Uh. No. In the US system, if you got 29 percent, you'd be destroyed in the largest landslide ever. You'd win zero states. It's possible I suppose you could win a bunch of states by being a favored son, but you'd never win the presidency.

Not to forget that the winner takes all system opens the door to voting manipulations, like the Gerrymandering, which plagues many states, especially those led by the GOP.

Gerrymandering only works if there is a very large geographical divide in the voting (ie, some areas are more republican, and other areas more democrat).

The reason why the Democrats hate gerrymandering is because they did a terrible job of it. In order to preserve black majority districts, they had to gerrymander them. The consequence is that they have very highly safe seats, which makes all the other seats vulnerable.

Gerrymandering is only prevalent in elections within say, 2, 3 percent. Otherwise it just gets overwhelmed by the electorate.

Also I have to say that it is very strange to claim something like a "broader coalition in the republican party" as countermeasure against fascism in the USA.

It's true. You have a lot of former democrats who #walkedaway, driving Trump into power. Particularly white rural democrats in IA, MI, MN, OH, PA, IN and IL.

(in the german multi party system on the other hand, almost always the majority party has to do formal coalition negotiations with one or 2 other parties in order to gain more than 50% in the partliament ... that means, a coalition treaty is set up in which it is formalized what ministries go to which party and also roughly outlined which stances the coalition government will have towards several topics. This way there is less danger (than in the factual US 2 party system), that a part of the ruling party/parties is just kept silenced and the extremist minority takes control ... if any of the parties violates the coalition treaty, the other party/parties can just decide that the treaty is void and the coalition breaks away (enforcing either new coalition negotiations, or even completely new elections))

It would be possible for the Nazi party to dominate german elections every year given their current system. With 30+ percent, they would rival the CDU and the socialists as a power bloc.

[Proteus_MST]

....

It would be possible for the Nazi party to dominate german elections every year given their current system. With 30+ percent, they would rival the CDU and the socialists as a power bloc.

That`s where you show your lack of understanding about the (german) proportional voting system.

No, if the Nazis have 30% they would not dominate, because they don't have more than 50% of parliamentary seats (which are neccessary to form a government).
The Nazi party would first have to find one or more other parties that are willing to form a coalition in order to (together with the party/parties) get more than 50% of the parliamentary seats.

If they don't find a coalition partner then everything (including the appopintment of the state president and the members of his cabinet can be blocked by the other parties).
In this case the other parties also can decide to form their own coalition with which they reach more than 50% on their own.

Example:
The Nazi party has 30% (las in your example)
The CDU have 25%, SPD have 18 % and the Green Party have 10 %.

In this case the CDU, SPD and Green Party can form a coalition that brings them 53% of the parliament seats and means that this coalition will be the rulign government and not the Nazis.

Actually this is the problem of far right parties like the AfD and the NPD. No other party will want to have them in a coalition, so the probability that they will be part of the ruling government of a german state or the federal republic is rather tiny.

Also as an addendum:
Remember that, unlike the USA, we don't vote people directly into governmental positions.
All positions in the cabinet and also the position of the federal chancellor or a state president are appointed by the parliament (either federal or state) ...
even Fraiu Merkel was not elected by the citizens, but rather, the citizens voted for the parliament and then the CDU formed a coalition that brought them a majority of votes
(currently, for example the CDU and the SPD form a coalition (with the cabinet positions being divided between those 2 parties according to the coalition treaty they negotiated)) and afterwards the parliamentary majority decided to appoint Angela Merkel to the position of chancellor for a 4th time.

If you don't have the absolute majority in the parliament (i.e. > 50 % ) and the majority of the parliament is against you, you cannot appoint any positions (as they always are blocked by the other parties) and you cannot govern and (unless the other parties form a coalition that brings them the majority) the elections will have to be repeated



That is the big difference compared to the USA. In the german multi party system the parties have to make compromises, as they usually don't have the > 50% majority in order to govern on their own. They have to think about which coalition partners fit to them and also give away some of their own power (i.e. cabinet positions) in order to form a functioning government. Governments in germany are almost always the result between 2 or more party positions and even the minor partners in those coalition have power as, if they decide that the conditions of the coalition treaty have been violated, they can just walk away from the coalition, letting the number of parliamentary seats in the coalition fall below 50% (and therefore making the state/federal republic hard to govern ... or even enforcing new elections)

[Broken_Erika]

Compromise is for Commies!

[Ben Kenobi]

No, if the Nazis have 30% they would not dominate, because they don't have more than 50% of parliamentary seats (which are neccessary to form a government).
The Nazi party would first have to find one or more other parties that are willing to form a coalition in order to (together with the party/parties) get more than 50% of the parliamentary seats.

And that's what they did last time with the Conservatives and the Centre party in the Reichstag. If they are that big, people are going to listen to them because excluding them from power is going to have consequences too, such as instability and inability to govern as we saw during Weimar.

Actually this is the problem of far right parties like the AfD and the NPD. No other party will want to have them in a coalition, so the probability that they will be part of the ruling government of a german state or the federal republic is rather tiny.

They also aren't as big as the Nazi party was, but if you look at your history the same thing was said of the Nazis until they grew large enough to be the biggest party.

If you don't have the absolute majority in the parliament (i.e. > 50 % ) and the majority of the parliament is against you, you cannot appoint any positions (as they always are blocked by the other parties) and you cannot govern and (unless the other parties form a coalition that brings them the majority) the elections will have to be repeated

Which is why what von Hindenburg did was so crucial.

That is the big difference compared to the USA. In the german multi party system the parties have to make compromises, as they usually don't have the > 50% majority in order to govern on their own.

What you miss about the British/American system is that the parties that are in power generally are large coalitions within themselves. Now, occasionally we will get alignments with either one or the other, this recent period is one of the most polarized in American history. This polarization has sharpened the differences between the two, but you'll still get a wider variety of views than you'll see in a German party.

I'm not really a trump supporter. I was a nevertrumper during the election. I support immigration, I support free trade, and yet there are pro union folks in the Republican party, pro tariff people. THe party is not and has never been a monolith.

[Proteus_MST]

...
They also aren't as big as the Nazi party was, but if you look at your history the same thing was said of the Nazis until they grew large enough to be the biggest party.
...

You underestiomate the change in mindset between trhe generation trhat voted for the Nazis and the generation today.
The generation that voted for the Nazis were nationalists and militarists, not unlike the Trump crowd

The generation that forms the majority of germany today is much much more to the political left (more left than the US democrats (which on our political spectrum would be somethign akin to the CDU).

Would it be possible that the right would gain power?
Of course, if the right becomes so much en vogue that the whole societal climate changes it may principially possible ... but nowadays the climate is differently.
It can, however not happen that a bunch of extremists (like now under Trump) "kidnaps" the ruling party in order to exerts its own extremist wishes upon the majority (with the party members being so partisan, that they just don't realize it and its party leaders just playing along with the extremists)

...
What you miss about the British/American system is that the parties that are in power generally are large coalitions within themselves. Now, occasionally we will get alignments with either one or the other, this recent period is one of the most polarized in American history. This polarization has sharpened the differences between the two, but you'll still get a wider variety of views than you'll see in a German party.

I'm not really a trump supporter. I was a nevertrumper during the election. I support immigration, I support free trade, and yet there are pro union folks in the Republican party, pro tariff people. THe party is not and has never been a monolith.

Actually you say it for yourself:
You are a supporter of free trade and immigration.
But because your party currently is led by extemists, your wishes ()and those who think like your) are totally ignored without you being able to do anything about it.

And that's it ... say the only republican candidate (for congress / senate) in your voting district is a xenophobe anti free trade person.
Then you can only have the choice toi not vote for him (or vote for the democrat who, on the other hand, may have lots of other points you disagree with).

In germany you always have a lot of choices:
You want the christian side respected (and a program slight to the right of the (european) political spoectrum? Vote CDU
You are pro a state that helps the poor and pro unions? Vote the SPD
You are pro environment? Vote the greens
You want to have the needs of a technophile young generations be respected? Vote Pirates
You are a xenophobe white supremacist type? Vote AfD
You are even more right of the spectrum, maybe even a Neonazi? Vote NPD

If your party becomes part of the governmental coalition, it is guaranteed that your wishes/political views, at least partially (depending on the percentage of seats your party contributes to the coalition) become respected (because it is formalized in the coalition treaty and the other members of the coalition wouldn't want your party to walk away from it)

(although, as I said, if you vote for the AfD or NPD, don't expect your party to become part of a coalition ... no, not even with 30% ... they are political poison that no other p<arty wants to touch)

[Ben Kenobi]

You underestiomate the change in mindset between trhe generation trhat voted for the Nazis and the generation today.

As Germany becomes more chaotic and unstable, nationalistic parties will continue to make gains. The best way to contain them is to fix the problems before they become so large and so explosive.

Merkel et al have lost a lot of trust over the past while.

But because your party currently is led by extemists, your wishes ()and those who think like your) are totally ignored without you being able to do anything about it.

The republican party is large enough to accommodate my wishes.

(although, as I said, if you vote for the AfD or NPD, don't expect your party to become part of a coalition ... no, not even with 30% ... they are political poison that no other p<arty wants to touch)

The same was said of the Nazis in the late 20s, and early 30s. If the approach is that the needs of their electorate are, 1, irrelevant and 2, safely ignored, that's hardly a recipe for effective governance going forward.

[Proteus_MST]

As Germany becomes more chaotic and unstable, nationalistic parties will continue to make gains. The best way to contain them is to fix the problems before they become so large and so explosive.

Merkel et al have lost a lot of trust over the past while.

Don't worry, germany is quite stable.
AfD tried to use similar populist fearmongering as Trump in order to gain votes ... well, in some states they got round 10-15% ... but that`s it.
The average german is (thanks to our public school system) too well educated than to fall for it

The republican party is large enough to accommodate my wishes.

It doesn't matter if the party has people who think like you, if the party leadership acts totally contrary against your wishes/beliefs.
(as you said, you are a believer in free trade and immigreation ... Trump does absolutely the contrary of what you would wish )
In germany you would be able to find a party more tailored around your wishes ... it may not be always be included in a governing coalition, but you can be quite sure that its party leadership will not act so totally against the values of part of its party as the republicans do (as, due to the presence of so many other parties, the bandwidth of different values within a party is more narrow ... a right extremist Neonazi in the USA, for example, would most probably select the GOP as his party of choice ... in germany he would rather select the AfD or NPD instead of one of the larger parties)

The same was said of the Nazis in the late 20s, and early 30s. If the approach is that the needs of their electorate are, 1, irrelevant and 2, safely ignored, that's hardly a recipe for effective governance going forward.

The only way Hitler was able to get to power was by faking terrorism and then abusing the Ermächtigungsgesetz.
We don't have a law that gives the Federal President or Chancellor such powers anymore.
Also we don't allow parties to have private armed militias like Hitlers SA (which he used in order to intimidate the other parties and also to keep them from getting to the important parliamentary sessions)




Also, lets look at the USA for contrast:
Say that the GOP keeps both houses and under Trump the right extremists in the GOP become even more powerful and the GOP senate, as willful accomplice of Trump, will enact a federal muslim identification law in which each muslim is forced (under penalty of prison) to have a red half moon patch sewn onto his clothes at a clearly visible location.
And lets assume that the senate will also enact a law where all muslim prison inmates will be transferred from their normal prisons to separate prison camps in Sheriff Arpaio style (i.e. no weather protextion, prisoners have to do hard labor in order to get money for necessities and deaths will be covered-up).

What would the moderate GOP base do in orderto prevent this?
My guess:
Nothing (but rather buy propaganda that all muslims are evil ... and/or find biblical reasons why marking muslims (and putting them in prison camps) are justified courses of action)

The other question:
What could the moderate GOP base do to prevent this?
My guess:
Nothing, except maybe elect the vote differently in the next elections ... but considerin that Trumps propaganda has succesfully villified the Dems, I doubt that many GOP members will do so. That the GOP base will have to wait till the next elections will also result in the GOP having up to 2 years to cement these fascist rulings

[Uncle Sparky]

To see how easy it it, look at how the Equal Rights Amendment to the US constitution was adopted (actually, not quite yet) -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment

[Dinner]

I would definitely like to see an end to first part the post and winner take all electoral systems. That would make every state a battle ground state and we would start seeing more representative outcomes. Of course, gerrymandering will remain a curse on American democracy until a constitutional amendment is ratified.

[Ben Kenobi]

Don't worry, germany is quite stable.
AfD tried to use similar populist fearmongering as Trump in order to gain votes ... well, in some states they got round 10-15% ... but that`s it.
The average german is (thanks to our public school system) too well educated than to fall for it

I have family in Germany. My cousins live there. What I'm hearing is that there's increasing instability wrt to Islam thanks to Merkel and that very little is being done to protect Germans. What you're saying here is making me more concerned rather than less.

I've also had two good friends of mine travel there and they remarked that they no longer felt safe when going. One had travelled to the black forest, another to Brandenburg gates within the last couple of years. Both were experienced travelers and had been to Germany earlier, and things had changed quite drastically for them. I believe them.

It doesn't matter if the party has people who think like you, if the party leadership acts totally contrary against your wishes/beliefs.

The party has done a pretty good job representing my issues in general.

(as you said, you are a believer in free trade and immigreation ... Trump does absolutely the contrary of what you would wish )

He's done a better job than the fellow who is supposed to represent me. I have significant issues with his choices, but in general, Americans are doing better. They'd be doing even better if they didn't try to impose tariffs, as it's a drag on their economic performance, but it's night and day from the Obama days. Growing at 4 percent a year is huge, and the interest rate is back up to about half normal. Interest rate increases help with my performance on American investments and the USD which also helps me.

So while I don't agree with everything he's done, he's been a net performer for me.

In germany you would be able to find a party more tailored around your wishes ... it may not be always be included in a governing coalition, but you can be quite sure that its party leadership will not act so totally against the values of part of its party as the republicans do (as, due to the presence of so many other parties, the bandwidth of different values within a party is more narrow ... a right extremist Neonazi in the USA, for example, would most probably select the GOP as his party of choice ... in germany he would rather select the AfD or NPD instead of one of the larger parties)

That's probably true. Not sure what I would vote for in Germany. In England I'd have been a UKIP voter, but I probably would have voted for Frau May in the last election. The BNP has nothing for me.

The only way Hitler was able to get to power was by faking terrorism and then abusing the Ermächtigungsgesetz.

Yep, but he also had critical support from the Centre and the Conservatives in Hindenburg who preferred him to the Communists. They believed they could control Hitler rather than the other way around, which was a tragic (and avoidable) mistake. The best way to resolve pressing issues is for the more mainstream parties to deal with them in their fashion.

Also we don't allow parties to have private armed militias like Hitlers SA (which he used in order to intimidate the other parties and also to keep them from getting to the important parliamentary sessions)

Then why aren't you doing more to curb Sharia? From what I'm seeing is that yes, you do have private armies, in Islamic militias that are pretty much ungoverned.

Say that the GOP keeps both houses and under Trump the right extremists in the GOP become even more powerful and the GOP senate, as willful accomplice of Trump, will enact a federal muslim identification law in which each muslim is forced (under penalty of prison) to have a red half moon patch sewn onto his clothes at a clearly visible location.

The honest truth is that such a law would be unnecessary because they already identify themselves. That being said, nobody's calling for such a law. What is being called is for regulations and restrictions banning sharia law and it's implementation, including prosecutions for those engaging in honor killings. America has already seen terror attacks committed by Muslims on American soil. America is a free country and that includes people who leave Islam.