What if: America's four political parties
American voters increasingly break down like a four-party system. If our system of governing was dictated by coalition-building, that might work.
Jan. 24, 2021, 8:50 AM EST
By Dante Chinni
WASHINGTON — New president, new Congress, same partisan divide, right? Already the familiar laments about the red/blue split in Washington have started and there are many signs those left/right differences are still alive and well. But as both parties deal with internal tensions, that simple binary color code might miss some important nuance in 2021’s politics.
The latest NBC News poll shows that both the Democrats and Republicans have clear divides within them as well and that could have real meaning in the months ahead on a range of issues.
On the surface the partisan identification numbers look very familiar.
About 4 in 10 registered voters identify as Democrats or lean Democratic. A little less than that identify as Republicans or lean Republican. The remainder are what we call hard independents or simply don’t care to answer. But dig into those two partisan groups a bit and the numbers change. In fact, four “parties” emerge in the data.
more
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/what-if-america-s-four-political-parties-n1255450
= new reply since forum marked as read
running the UK...their version of Donald Trump...sure those multiple parties were so much help and all.
them into people who vote and those less likely to. The reactionary right votes in higher percentages than average, those drawn to radical left leaders significantly lower.
Second, conviction of beliefs in those polled. A lot of people relatively frivolously SAY they're for something that deviates from their basic orientation because it sounded good. In both last elections many people said they would vote for Sanders on the Democratic ticket or for the leading Democratic candidate 
; ridiculous as that was -- a lifelong socialist revolutionary who despises liberal Democrats or a lifelong liberal Democrat -- they didn't know it. They figured it was just two different styles of Democrat, aggressively "idealistic" with big promises versus ordinary with promises they believed achievable.
BUT they'd know it big time if Sanders had run as the head of a separate, much smaller party. As it was, about 24% of Sanders' own minority following in the first primary was dedicated to him; the same people were with him in the second and would follow him to a third party. How many would stay loyal and how many would vote are open questions -- radical left parties in America lack have always failed for lack of support and ended up breaking apart from their own internal strife.
As for a far-right party made up of traitors and nutcases too extreme for what most of our conservative right has become politically? I'd give it noisy stagger to a dismal fail in 2022 before survivors ran back to join the majority.
Also HUGE, those tending radical-reactionary to extremist on both right and left are minorities of the electorate, typically running anywhere from 12-20+% depending. Not half, or we wouldn't be here. But both extremes have a lot in common, often more than their differences. Which means they'd often try to team up with others, both each other and with the big out-of-power party, against the one in power. As minority parties always have to do to get power or just to remain relevant. And corruption of beliefs and goals always follows.
and communists wooed the same potential supporters and why in this one Sanders and Trump were doing the same.
You deserve an expert treatment of this, but the more along the radical to extreme spectrum people get, the more righteously and ruthlessly opposed to the vast mainstream, whom they regard as corrupt and unable to see what they do. The more extreme the more they see the compromise and cooperation intrinsic to democracy as proof of corruption and failure of principles.
I've read that a common characteristic is always being sure there's a crisis only they can save everyone from, but that's not so distinguishing these days when we have real crises everyone sees. Of course both see majority rule (by anyone but them) as inevitably leading to disaster.
There are other similarities I'm not thinking of, but they both depend intensively on dishonesty and irrationality to sustain their views. In any case, they understand each other a lot better than they do everyone else.
Oh, and I've never forgotten how an expert on extremism once described a difference between the two that seems to me to also be a similarity: that RW extremists "hate" everyone else, while LW extremists "hate" themselves. (I.e., everything they most identify with, their own nation, the dominant party on the left, etc).
