Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Tips for talking to loved ones about democracy

Tips for talking to loved ones about democracy
Getty Images

Ernst is a veteran and advocate of democracy related reforms as a member of Veterans for All Voters, recently renamed from Veterans for Political Innovation.

With Thanksgiving sneaking up, most of us look forward to good food and company, but secretly dread the side squabbles about politics and other hot topics. Maybe it starts with a goofy uncle throwing a zinger about the economy, or a know-it-all teenager parroting something they saw online. Before long, people are focused less on gratitude and more on an unwanted political debate where nobody learns anything or changes their mind. Ugh.


If you find yourself in this circumstance, maybe there's an opportunity to steer things towards a constructive moment. This might be the right time to plant the idea that there actually are some reforms aiming to strengthen our republic's democratic processes, and thus the things that frustrate them. But the truth is, the vast majority of our neighbors, friends and relatives are still quite unfamiliar with concepts like open primaries or ranked choice voting, or how they connect to the bigger picture of effective governance. If advocates of measures like RCV and open primaries are to ever see these ideas scaled broadly then there's a lot of small talk that needs to happen over dinner or a drink. One conversation at a time.

But how do you get started? The problem is - well, what's the problem? Here are three likely scenarios that may pop up at Thanksgiving or other gatherings with friends and family.

Scenario 1: Someone doesn't like the state of politics or "the other side" but they think they've got it all figured out already. How do you hear them out, and challenge them? There's a lot to unpack.

Scenario 2: Someone doesn't like the state of politics but doesn't really have their thoughts ironed out yet, they just know it's all terrible. How do you help them and steer them?

Scenario 3: Two people get right at it and their spirited political "debate" is going nowhere good in a hurry. How do you help them both to step back and focus on root causes, not just the symptoms they're angry about?

Two Ways To Help Reframe The Conversation

Each conversation will always be unique, but here are two suggestions to help you break the ice, illuminate root causes, and open the door for constructive conversation about healthy democracy reforms like RCV and open primaries.

The Five Whys: There's a simple exercise to help drill down to root causes while preventing a conversation from going down endless rabbit holes. It's called "The Five Levels of Why," and it's as simple as asking the question "why?" five times. Ask them "Why is it that they're so energized about politician X, policy Y, or hot issue Z?" Let them respond, and then simply ask yet again, "Why is that party or politician able (or not) to do that?" or something along those lines. Let them respond as long as they want. Then ask again, "Why can't our processes enable / stop that?" You get the point. Somewhere around "Why" #3 or #4 you'll start to wrestle with how our elected officials are elected, incentivized, and held accountable. Bingo, this is your chance to hypothetically pose if there's a better way. From there, see where the conversation goes. Even if you don't convince them of any solution outright, you're at least helping to connect the dots for them that our flawed democratic processes are the main culprit in why some political problems seem to only be getting worse.

A Riddle To Find Common Ground

If the conversation is just taking a free-flow or is clearly on the wrong track and you'd like to just cut to the chase, then pose a question to bring a new focus. Here are a few tough questions to intrigue people's investigative curiosity:

1) "Despite enormous disapproval of a probable Trump-Biden rematch, why does it seem unstoppable?"

Key points to bring up:

  • Spoiler effect is rampant. Over 70% of voters want "anyone else," but will they vote for anyone else? Unlikely. That's a spoiler effect in action. Primaries, and especially closed primaries, are another root problem.
  • Nowhere does our Constitution enshrine a two-party system. One way to open up beyond the duopoly is to permit people to vote their conscience on third parties and independents. The question is "how?" - cue Ranked Choice Voting.

2) "Uncle Joe, Thanksgiving sure used to be way less intense. Why is it that our nation is slowly getting more and more divided over the past four or more decades?"

Key points to bring up:

  • We can't blame any one or two administrations... 50+ year trends are systemic. What systems and processes are key?
  • Only 8-10% of voters typically vote in primaries. Why? Closed primaries and too many "safe" gerrymandered districts incentivize rage politics. The angriest candidates generally win. This is "being primaried."
  • Media and social media are key, but they are often only the messenger and neither the message itself nor the originator. How are politicians and the media both incentivized to take and amplify extreme positions?

Regardless of these two suggestions or if you go a different way, if they can walk away thinking the problem isn't "the other side" but instead "both of the sides," or "the whole system," then you've made progress to be proud of. You've at least opened the door for them to think about how the duopoly is so entrenched and the need to get after that without forcing ideas down their throat when they're not quite ready to see how they fit. When you see them again, you'll have a starting point to work from.

It doesn't matter if you're not an expert on all the reforms, or if you're a volunteer in one of the many organizations out there. The important thing is to be willing to engage those around us. If we all do our part to educate those who are unfamiliar and engage opponents who are likely persuadable, then fixing our system becomes a 'when', not 'if'. Good luck, and we at Veterans For All Voters hope you enjoy your Thanksgiving to the fullest.


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less