If a majority of right-thinking people marched to the polls and voted Republican, the story goes, the Democrat cheating would be useless.
But a majority of right-thinking people don't like Republicans any better than Democrats, for a variety of reasons. The brand is badly damaged.
Trump succeeded in 2016 in spite of being a Republican, not because of it. Kari Lake lost a very winnable election against a faceless capital letter (D) because she embraced the Republican label, only to learn the party elders distrusted her and did not have her back when the inevitable fraud occurred.
To defeat the collectivism ascendant in Western politics, a new movement is needed, one that appeals to disaffected voters from both parties. The Left recoiled in terror from Trump/MAGA - fearing it was just that movement - but Trump's allegiance to the damaged (R) brand has cost him a lot of support since 2017. Notice how they never attack Trump for any part of his popular 2016 campaign platform - but they constantly attack him for the perceived sins of the Republican brand.
True, but Trump never got a majority of the popular vote. His brand has problems, too.
In the Reagan era, many had the idea that if only people had a clear choice they would vote for the more conservative candidate. That may not be true now. The country has changed. Voters are more propagandized and manipulated by the government and media.
Nicely said.
Since the rise of the political consultant, voting has been based on hate (which one do you hate more?) The "donor community" has made sure that the "two parties" each offer one thing the people want, and one thing the people hate.
Their assistants then can drive people to the polls, or to sign ballots, and depending on where, when, and who, consistently produce a 51-49 or 49-51 result resulting in MORE hatred, MORE division, and, not coincidentally, more good for the "donor community" and more bad for the people whoever wins.
Posts one and two above are excellent examples of what I am talking about
A broad spectrum "good of the nation" party does not exist and cannot emerge under the rule of the "donor community".
It is possible, still, to have a movement that wins elections 75-25. But I do not see a path to get there without a timeout, like Matt Bracken writes about, and as a great American once said, "I'm too old to go bushwhacking".