> I'm sure that a GOP candidate could pull the right strings to get a plurality vote
There was a bunch of hubub on the Right in the fall about a Democrat win leading to Democrats tilting the tables in all sorts of ways that would lead to a "permanent Democrat majority".
I always came back to the same point as you, two-party politics will naturally self-balance at a pretty even split.
At a city / state level, you might be able to maintain one-party control through various levels of corruption / influence, but the nation itself is way too fickle to put up with that for long.
The weak link in the current majority will always tend to switch sides as soon as it appears that they might gain an advantage by doing so.
It’s not all right people, it’s the more reactionary racist types, who inhabit the right wing media outlets.... end of the day, those folks don’t want certain people voting.
There was a bunch of hubub on the Right in the fall about a Democrat win leading to Democrats tilting the tables in all sorts of ways that would lead to a "permanent Democrat majority".
I always came back to the same point as you, two-party politics will naturally self-balance at a pretty even split.
At a city / state level, you might be able to maintain one-party control through various levels of corruption / influence, but the nation itself is way too fickle to put up with that for long.
The weak link in the current majority will always tend to switch sides as soon as it appears that they might gain an advantage by doing so.