Why are the Americans keeping the two-party system ?

Why are the Americans keeping the two-party system ?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Because most Americans can´t count past two.

Because most people buy into the "wasted third party vote" meme, despite the fact that less than half of voting age Americans actually vote in elections.

Because the current first-past-the-post voting system favours the two-party system.

Replace it with proportional vote (Australia) or preferential vote (Germany), you will see third parties in the congress, but that's in the interest of either Democrats or Republicans, so the current retarded system is perpetuated.

Two parties are a result of the winner-takes-all style elections. Europe can have multiple parties because after a European election, every party gets proportional representation in the new government

Two party systems are the natural outcome of how out elections are structured.

All the parties in the US are more like coalitions, they aren't as ideologically consistent between members as European parties. Look at the Democrats: Sanders is a socialist and Hillary Clinton is a necon.

Because coalition's are a great way to mismanage governance

We get to pick our leader during the primaries (if they aren't rigged), that's why we picked a national socialist on the Republican side and a neocon on the democrat side

if it ain't broken, why fix it?

Because the electoral college is pretty much based off of two candidates running. Hence why the number is just over half of the available votes to win the election. Rather than amend that we would rather just limit ourselves to two choices.

Because the president wins by plurality, not majority.
If we had a different voting system, then we would have more than 2 parties.

We have the electoral college which was created by the (((two parties))) to preserve the (((two parties))).

Coincidentally, Canada is set to change the voting system to something other than FPTP before the next federal election.

Because America is like that tom petty song runaway train

Why would you want 34% of the population to have power over the rest?

and why is that? do the have a reason

Not Tim petty soul asylum
www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/soulasylum/runawaytrain.html

Comme si c etait different en france tu a LRPS et c est tout. Fn est une creation de miterrant pour diviser le RPR dans les annees 80

As if it s different in france you have to chose from LR/PS. Fn s a creation of miterrant to hinder RPR in the 80s

America is way too diverse to have a parliamentary system
If we had more than two parties we would have A whole bunch of fringe groups represented in national politics like BLM and occupy Wall Street (which is already happening)

Lies one... teo... umm USA USA USA

the structure of our system demands it.

What do you have now and what kind of system are you going to adopt?

There is no "two party system." There is a minimum number of electoral votes required to win the presidency, so voters tend to really around the two parties that are most likely to win. The smaller parties are a joke so no-one votes for them. There is nothing official about any political party in the US.

only the fact that there wouldn't be a fucking cucked socialist green party in my countries parliament makes me want a two party system here

Because parties keep winning majority government with no where near majority of popular vote due to vote splitting.

and with what will you change it? what will you replace it with?

There is nothing wrong with the two party system
If the people get upset with leadership they can challenge in the primaries
See trump

Donald ain't a NatSoc.

youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM

No, FN was financed by anti communists to steal the laborer s voices from the Communist Party.

The electoral college was created before the parties existed to preserve federalism
If anything the House should be eliminated to save it

Preferential vote can solve that problem.

The winner has to be the first choice or one of alternate choices of the majority of voters.

WOOO DEMOCRACY! ITS THE PRO BOWL BITCHES! NO MATTER WHAT TEAM YOU ACTUALLY SUPPORT YOURE GONNA END UP ROOTING FOR ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER! NFC VS AFC IS THE WAY OF THE WORLD! IF YOU THINK THAT THE ONLY REASON WE STILL HAVE ELECTIONS IS BECAUSE THE POWERS THAT BE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CLAIM WE ASKED TO BE RUINED WHEN THEY RUIN US THEN YOU NEED TO FUCK OFF CUZ YOURE WRONG! WHO CARES! COKE VS PEPSI! MORE TASTE LESS FILLING HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA WE ALL DESERVE TO DIE

It's a Nash equilibrium given that the President must win a simple majority of the electoral votes. Also bills need a simple majority in the house/senate

well, hopefully you are right.

No FN was financed by famous anti communists like Reverend Moon, a south koran, to attract laborers by making them believe the FN was defending them while they are ultra capitalists and to stand against the Communist Party.

we don't have a two party system, people have been successfully SCARED into thinking it's the only way.

Our electoral system was not devised with "parties" in mind. In practice, it is very difficult to have more than two parties in a FPTP Democratic Republic. Britain and France have different systems, but notice that in both countries (at least in Britain until 2010) it's very difficult for a third party to get into power. Look how hard it is for the FN, even leaving aside the fact that the cuckservatives and commies collude to keep them out. No third party has ever come close even to FN's support, and the FN still hasn't won a national election

Even in multiparty proportional systems like Germany, Sweden, Netherlands, etc., you still see two main parties or semi-permanent coalitions, center-left, center-right.

Basically, that's what the dems and GOP are. Instead of having a formal center-right party, pro-business party, christian party, nationalist party, all governing in coalition, we have a "Big Tent" Republican party containing each of those factions, candidates who belong to one faction or the other doing better in different states and cities than others.

One thing I think we do better than a proportional/parliamentary system is that the parties don't control the candidate rolls. We have open(ish) primaries, which frees individual politicians to dissent from the party-line much more openly and often than in a country where the party leadership can de-list a MP if he speaks out too much.

I'm Portuguese and back in my country we have a government made from a horrible last-minute coalition of socialists, communists and left bloc (basically SJW party), they hate eachother and it's such a mess. They only formed it because the ring wing won the elections with a relative majority. It's such a shitty system, they can just hijack the government if they wish to.

No one outside the two major parties has the organizational talent or the resources to compete with them, sadly

Retards like Gary Johnson remind them why its a good idea

But it is bro-
>Israel
Almost got me, Shekelstein.

It's a system set up in such a way that it cannot support more than 2 parties at a time. The only thing you can do is, if the stars align and you sacrifice enough goats to the gods, you might be able to switch out one of the parties. You're then still at a 2 party system, just that one of them has a different colour.

The people don't do it, the donors/money do, they decide this shit.