4 ms·

The difference between the multiparty countries and the USA is that in the USA the compromises needed to form a government are made before you do the final vote

by sidibe 4y ago

The difference between the multiparty countries and the USA is that in the USA the compromises needed to form a government are made before you do the final vote. In some ways I think that's better because the parties have to have a fuller and more realistic platform than in Europe where you can get a bunch of parties in power only caring about a few issues each and the tradeoffs aren't presented upfront

Waterluvian 4y ago
I find it works amazingly well in Canada where there is commonly no one party in power. That any one party must get the support of one or more other parties to pass any bill. This creates mandatory compromise. During a majority government where a single party has enough votes, I generally agree with you.
- nikitaga 4y ago
  You are grossly overselling how "amazing" Canadian governance is. Canada has essentially the same two party system as the US, with one of the two major parties winning literally every election in the last 100 years, and all but one election since the country's inception. Occasional minority governments gave us some nice things, but that was decades ago, in a whole other world. Canadian elections are cursed by FPTP much like the US is, and much unlike all the other developed countries that have true multi-party governance with some form of proportional representation.
- AYBABTME 4y ago
  FPTP caused the Liberal party to be in power in Canada for most governments until they were ejected from politics for gross corruption. And since then they've been put in the corner for a bit, and slowly are coming back to being the prevalent ruling party. Justin Trudeau made a campaign promise a few elections ago about replacing FPTP for a multi turn system and after being elected, promptly setup a sham study, which unsurprisingly found out that Canadian voters would be oh so confused if FPTP was to be replaced by a multi turn election system. I wouldn't say Canada fares much better, in the long term. At least the Liberals are pretty benign.

by sidibe 4y ago

Waterluvian 4y ago

I find it works amazingly well in Canada where there is commonly no one party in power. That any one party must get the support of one or more other parties to pass any bill. This creates mandatory compromise. During a majority government where a single party has enough votes, I generally agree with you.

nikitaga 4y ago
You are grossly overselling how "amazing" Canadian governance is. Canada has essentially the same two party system as the US, with one of the two major parties winning literally every election in the last 100 years, and all but one election since the country's inception. Occasional minority governments gave us some nice things, but that was decades ago, in a whole other world. Canadian elections are cursed by FPTP much like the US is, and much unlike all the other developed countries that have true multi-party governance with some form of proportional representation.
AYBABTME 4y ago
FPTP caused the Liberal party to be in power in Canada for most governments until they were ejected from politics for gross corruption. And since then they've been put in the corner for a bit, and slowly are coming back to being the prevalent ruling party. Justin Trudeau made a campaign promise a few elections ago about replacing FPTP for a multi turn system and after being elected, promptly setup a sham study, which unsurprisingly found out that Canadian voters would be oh so confused if FPTP was to be replaced by a multi turn election system. I wouldn't say Canada fares much better, in the long term. At least the Liberals are pretty benign.