Donna Brandenburg for Michigan Governor

Part 2/2
By November, the alternative candidates—those who skipped the primary circus—start from a recognition deficit that the process itself created.
Bandwagon effects and social proof follow. Early primary results, polling, and media narratives create the sense that “this is who is winning.” People prefer to align with perceived winners. Momentum becomes self-reinforcing. The long primary season allows these dynamics to solidify long before general election voters fully engage. It is a slow-motion consensus-building exercise that favors continuity over disruption.

There is also the sunk-cost psychology. Once voters, donors, activists, and media outlets have invested time, money, and emotional energy in the primary, they have a stake in the outcome.

Defending “their” nominee becomes identity-protective. The general election is framed as a binary contest between the two primary products, and any third option is portrayed as a threat to that investment. This is classic in-group/out-group dynamics applied to the political marketplace.

Finally, the primary process cultivates learned helplessness regarding alternatives. Year after year, the public is trained that real politics happens inside the two parties. Outside options are marginalized by the calendar, the coverage, and the rules. When people complain that both parties fail them, the system replies by offering another round of the same primary theater. The cycle continues.

Designed Continuity, Not Representation
The practical effect is an entrenched system with little interest in genuine representation of the broader public. The two parties use the primary season to advertise themselves, test messages, raise money, and solidify their brands at public expense and with media cooperation. The months of hype create the appearance of vigorous democracy while narrowing the actual field of viable choices.

Corruption and self-perpetuation do not require conspiracy in every detail. They require incentives and structures that reward those who play the game and punish those who refuse. The primary process is one of those structures. It gives the major parties a months-long, state-facilitated platform that minor parties are denied. It conditions voters to see the general election as a runoff between two pre-selected products. It keeps the entrenched players in power by making alternatives appear late, under-resourced, and somehow less legitimate.

We reject that process. The U.S. Taxpayers Party of Michigan nominates by convention and goes straight to the November ballot. We do not ask the state to run our internal selection for us, nor do we accept the artificial advantage the primary system hands the two major parties. Voters who want something different will find us there in November … without the months of manufactured momentum, without the psychological conditioning, and without the structural favoritism that keeps the same game running.

The primary spectacle is not neutral. It is not a pure political process that serves “we the people.” It is a carefully structured advantage wrapped in the language of choice. Recognizing that is the first step toward demanding a system that actually serves the people rather than the parties that have captured it.

Next step … stop the programming of straight ticket voting. Think for yourself … instead of voting for entrenched bureaucrats.

#VoteBrandenburg #votebrandenburg

@Brandenburg4Mi

🔥12❤2👍2

419 viewsedited 11:40