Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
–
Thanks I wasn't aware of this.
That explains the majority of my voting record.One is the result of the "fusion" (or an alliance very like fusion) of the weak parties, and the other is the "elimination" of weak parties by the voters, by which he means that the voters gradually desert the weak parties on the grounds that they have no chance of winning.
Fun fact I learned from a math-inclined friend the other day, the main voting system used in the US is fundamentally flawed and breaks down very quickly as you add more (popular) candidates. Take Gore and Nader in 2000, arguably having an arguably decent alternative and an arguably terrible main democratic candidate caused a vote split between which Bush slid in.
The trouble is also that as you add more choices, it becomes a lot easier for radicals to find their voice. The two-party system
helps silence the tea partiers and anarchists. Wikipedia has a great article on the matter, discussing many alternatives, unfortunately they all suffer from at least a subset of a wide range of problems.
–
thenewgreen · 4356 days ago · link ·
Interesting. So we either stick with the status quo or end up with a fringe lunatic or a less than ideal major party candidate "slipping in". Not sure I like those options. -Back to the drawing board!
briandmyers · 4356 days ago · link ·
Also, since the two parties are entrenched, they tend to become more alike over time. "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"