Two Party System. Why.
Two Party System. Why.
EDIT: To the people downvoting this post because democrats > republicans: you’re missing the point.
I see the campaign to suppress Democrat voter turnout has started.
I've voted democrat for every election I can remember. And while I like to see my "team" win as much as the next guy, at some point you realize that other countries have better electoral systems in place.
Meanwhile, we've all acquiesced to this 2-party winner takes all bullshit.
Same. Democrats are shit but I mean...fuck republicans more.
The way to end the 2-party stranglehold is to implement RCV or similar, and the only party trying to do that is the Democrats.
They do and I'd love to have a better method available to us.
However the meme is a little off.
One party doesn't give a fuck about you, the other actively wishes you harm and works to that end.
They're not "my team" but they're well past "the lesser of two evils" given the other one.
It is all over everything right now. It's giving me PTSD from 2016. Are we voting Jill Stein again?
If you'll match my donation I'll explain how Bernie can still win
If the duopoly of our government is enough to convince folks not to vote, they weren’t going to vote anyway and were just looking for a reason.
I don’t disagree with OP, but at the same time, we’ve only got one tool to enact change. So let’s use that tool to get things like ranked voting.
But you’re also right, plenty of folks out there telling folks to give up. All the more reason to not in my opinion.
The people we need most to turn out and vote this election season (18-24) are the most susceptible to this kind of campaign. And you very much can get them to vote with the right message.
That’sa lie. I’ve voted every election since eligible age but fuck the two majors. I’m happy to write in, but I’m not keen on Cornell anymore either so I’m about to nope, unless someone better than the status quo comes along.
Give up? More like the Republicans are grasping for straws considering how bad they have done in local and midterm elections. They could be putting propaganda to dissuade Democratic voters, which I don't see happening anytime soon. Biden (and many Democrats) has surprisingly been more progressive for me as a leftist and many people appreciate that. My theory is that the pandemic and the government response to alleviate the costs after the lockdowns made Americans appreciate more government assistance.
"first past the post" voting always devolves to a two party system. The founding fathers knew this and warned against it. Until we get ranked choice, or something similar, we're stuck.
CGP Grey video for those who want to know more
That’s a great video.
Not quite.
FPTP always devolves into local two candidate elections.
There's no guarantee, though, that those two parties are the same everywhere. Regional third parties can do quite well under FPTP. That particularly works for e.g. the Scottish National Party or the Bloc Quebecois.
Yeah. That's how Bernie keeps winning as an independent.
To be fair, the American Founding Fathers may not have had heard of the ranked choice voting. The idea was only just forming after the US became independent.
This is dumb as shit. Democrats aren't perfect but they do care. That is why they actively took steps to stop people from dying during COVID unlike the GOP. That's why they support universal healthcare, unlike the GOP. That's why they support public education unlike the GOP. That is why they support free and fair elections unlike the GOP.
Before I say anything else, if you're voting, right now at a national level at least, Democrats are essentially the only option if you give a shit about democracy and aren't an accelerationist.
That said: The GOP fucking up covid so hard is probably the only reason Trump didn't get re-elected. Democrats as a collective do not support universal healthcare. They had the capability to pass whatever they wanted in Obama's first term. They actively rejected even a public option. They fucked us (normal, non-rich people) hard, because, as a group, they ain't us. They could have fixed a lot of the issues around public education that were introduced in the bush administration, but they didn't. How's that student loan debt forgiveness going? They, again as a group not individually, hate the idea of all those loans not getting paid. THINK OF THE BANKS! As far as free and fair elections go, they benefit from the FPTP system, they will never get rid of it unless they're forced to.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS SAID: VOTING FOR DEMOCRATS AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL IS WHAT WE'RE STUCK WITH UNLESS WE WANT THINGS TO GET WAY, WAY WORSE.
The alternative to these fetid dickbags is fascists and yes, some literal Fucking Nazis.
In a world where the Overton window isn't totally fucked, Democrats are center-right. They, again as a group, give zero shits about regular people.
Yep. You can vote for the bad party or you can vote for the party that wants you dead. At least if you keep voting for the bad party the other side will get less bad to get more votes. Then you vote for the less bad party and so on until they actually start being good.
It’s so easy, but general population for some reason don’t think that way.
An easy solution will always sound more appealing than a complex one, even if the easy solution is a lie. MAGA Republicans offer only this.
Worried about immigration? "Build the wall!"
Think government is corrupt? "Drain the swamp"
Does LGBT stuff confuse you "Groomers!"
Scared of change? "Make America Great Again"
No real understanding of any of the underlying problems and no plans to address them. Just catchy slogans.
Only few dems actually support universal Healthcare, unfortunately, and the majority don't care about anything but lining their pockets. It's the same with the GOP, of course.
That being said, of course vote for dems if your only other option is reps. What's bad is better than what's terrible. However, don't simply vote and be done with it.
Educate yourself. Improve your life. Exercise, organize, teach. Grassroots praxis is where you can meaningfully improve the lives of your community, and carry that momentum elsewhere. The two party system isn't going to be corrected purely via electoralism, it's a stop-gap to prevent sliding into fascism.
Don't 'both sides' this one. The rule is and has always been:
- vote for the option that will help us be healthier, happier, and do our part
- repeat
The two options aren't even comparable anyway. It's like comparing the Flu to Covid.
BoTh siDeS tHo….
Here are some cold hard Ameri-facts for you:
- Having 2 dominant political parties is a reflection of how our political systems have been designed at almost every level (federal, state, local). American politics is very much based on first-past-the-post, winner-takes-all elections. These kinds of election systems are terrible for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the very real problem of vote splitting and the spoiler effect--leading to "third parties" which are almost all unserious, nonviable, and potentially backed by people with ulterior motives. The vast majority of the time, voting for a third party candidate in America is simply throwing your vote away and is effectively the same as not voting. (Even as a "protest", it's not a very good one, because it's never clear what can be interpreted from why people vote the way they do.)
The solution to this problem is changing how we run elections so that the most popular candidates are more likely to win, and so that people's individual votes are less likely to become nullified in various ways (like by voting for a statistically nonviable candidate, for one). I like Ranked Choice Voting and STAR voting, but just about anything is better than the way that most American elections currently work.
- Even in a hypothetical future where we have 10 viable parties (and more democratic voting systems), no political party is going to "give a fuck about you" as an individual. Republicans, Democrats, Greens, Libertarians, Vegetarians, Librarians, and whatever other parties spring up. The truth is, they all only give a fuck about getting your vote, so that they can get in a position of political power to do the things that they and their influential backers want (all the while reaping the benefits of doing so). There is no political party on Earth that is in it for the benefit of all of mankind--they all have some kind of agenda and ideology that they want to put in place.
In that way American politics is like a tug of war, we current have 2 viable parties, one pulling the rope to the left and another pulling the rope to the right. You can spend as much time as you want lamenting where the rope currently is compared to where you would like it to be. But if you want the rope to move left, it makes sense to join the left side. And if you want the rope to move right, it makes sense to join the right side. Sitting out just makes it easier for the "other side" to make "progress". Having more parties doesn't really change that, it just turns a 1-dimensional battle into an n-dimensional battle.
The biggest benefit that comes from having multiple (viable) political parties is increased competition of ideas. But again, America truly require huge systemic changes to how we run elections to make that a reality.
I'm going to be voting for the party that more closely aligns with the direction that I want the country to move in. It's the only smart move in the game of American politics.
Librarians lmao
The Constitution was literally the best a bunch of doped-up, syphilitic slaveholders could come up with to replace the divine right of kings. They even had a first try with the Articles of Confederation and fucked that up.
We really need to stop teaching kids that a system of government written by people who used leeches to cure hysteria is the greatest thing ever created.
But only one of those 2 parties actively wants to remove rights from the average citizen and give tax cuts to the wealthiest.
Yeah this meme is ass. If it makes anyone feel better, in Canada we have five parties that fail us instead of just two. The advantage there is we get to complain with more granularity. It's the uncommon lose-lose-lose-lose-lose!
Because:
A: the system is able to elect candidates who win despite only getting a minority of the vote. This problem becomes worse the more parties participate.
B: in order to maximise the chance of an acceptable compromise taking office, very fringe groups must vote for a very mainstream party. Usually that leaves only two parties that make sense.
C: as these parties become the political space, voting for a specific interest can erode support for the nearest main party, guaranteeing a victory for the other main party.
Bonus: D: growing comfortable with their voter base, it is in parties' interest to grow more radical.
In fact, without McCarthy and the Red Scare, I would find it strange that the American political scene has developed a nationalist "Republican" party and a moderately conservative "Democrat" party. Many more sane parliaments and governments develop their left to be a socialist or labour party.
So our choices in America are between conservative and slightly-less-conservative? So there's a growing demand for a socialist party that doesn't exist, but if it did exist it would lead to the domination of conservatives in politics?
Sounds like ranked choice voting would really help out with a lot of the issues that you presented. It's too bad that the people who make our laws were voted in using the old system and changing that system in any way is a conflict of interest for them.
I guess things will only ever change if we force the issue.
It's one of the reasons why I think America is institutionally fucked & rotten, that it'll take the better part of two centuries to fix it, and that if instead we want stuff to be fixed within a generation, we may need a violent uprising.
Because the rich have spent 2 centuries entrenching themselves in power, and literally everyone else won't do a thing about it.
We're all so apathetic that the impending collapse of our ecosystem is viewed with a shrug. When it should be met with torches and pitchforks in the street, and Madame Guillotine for the rich and powerful.
Nobody gives a shit because they're all waiting for someone else to do something.
Oh I'm pretty sure the rich entrenching their power goes back a wee bit longer than 2 centuries. Ask a feudal peasant.
I mean in the context of the USA. But yeah you are absolutely right.
2 centuriesforever
While I completely agree the issue is one party is completely playing in bad faith. I'm not says the Democrats are perfect and there is a fair amount of bad apples but Republican are complete taken over by bad actors that have no one interests but themselves and those that in rich them. At this time voting 3rd party wouldn't help, it would just make sure the Republican most likely trump will win.
America's Overton window so far to the right that the Republican Party is not as seen far-right fascist party but just "right" (no word play intended).
Imho the two party system is just a way to manipulate people and then put them against each other. Treating life like it's black or white like you either are an ally or a lifelong enemy that must be vanquished.
As far as I'm concerned the only point of modern politics is to keep people under control by giving them a false choice and a common enemy in their neighbor
Let's have a no party system like George Washington advised.
It'll just end up the same way with unofficial groupings.
I'd vote for the Turd sandwich, myself.
I wanna know how this photo happened
Photoshop
Oof I forgot that was a thing, thanks lol
This speaks to me. Thanks.
In multy-party system, you often end up voting for a party that then on your behalf makes deals with other parties to form coalition, deals you did not agree upon. It is like delegation of duty, or rather usurpation of your vote. And you still end up with fucked up government that does not reflect your values. In two party system you are the one who are forced to make those compromises.
In multiparty system, often one coalition (or even party) dominates for many years and election cycles. The two party system nearly guarantees strong opposition.
I still think that two party system is better.
Power balances inside those coalitions (which can vary wildly depending on the votes outcome, compared to two party system) affect a lot. If the stricter left-wing party wins over the center-left party and gets to be the PM party then obviously the coalition is going to be more left-wing. And so on.
And it offers much better options for people to shop for a party they actually agree with. Having to vote either this or that is a sucky system because it offers basically two avenues for you if you are not happy with the party you voted for. Either you switch to the other side totally (which is often not at all what you want) or you don't vote and you'll just end up helping the other party anyway. Great options.
Multiparty system offers much better option to vote for, but then there is only one coalition. So, the question is only if you are the one deciding what compromise to make, or party you vote for decides for you. There is argument to be made that it is better for democracy that you decide for that.
Each party in 2 party system tries to maximize number of votes and adjusts its position for that as well, which is similar to “power balances shift inside those coalitions” that you mention, but here, they are talking directly to voters, as opposed to each other. Again, I see advantage of two party system here.
I believe that bad perception of two party system is because now, we truly have two camps in our culture - the society is broken in two, cohesiveness is lost. But it is not because of the two party system, it is the opposite: because of this cultural break it propagated, “mirrored” into our politics. But it is exactly how it supposed to work in representative democracy. It would be strange if we had this cultural problem and our politicians would not.