3 ms·
Instead of spending time and effort to persuade people to throw their votes away, spend time and effort changing the voting system so that voting for third part
by muuh-gnu 15y ago
Instead of spending time and effort to persuade people to throw their votes away, spend time and effort changing the voting system so that voting for third parties isnt as futile as FPTP. In the European parliament, the members belong to approx 160 different parties. In the US, you have 2. It has been known for a long time that FPTP converges to 2 (Duverger's law). It makes no sense to keep FPTP but then make voters responsible for the unhealthy situation that emerges from it and persuade them to change their voting behaviour knowing that it makes no sense for them to change it.
- stfu 15y agoBut please don't use the European structure as an example for a democratic system. The European Commission (who are the core authority for proposing legislation) is not a democratically elected body but an "appointed" entity by the Council - a Council that up until the Lisbon Treaty wasn't even required to hold their meetings in public.
- muuh-gnu 15y agoI was comparing the US and the EU because of a similar size. When you have 160 parties representing the views of 500 Million Europeans, it is very unlikely that having merely 2 parties representing the views of 300 million Americans is a natural, healthy state of affairs. The EU is of course not a role model for democracy, but it shows that the lack of diversity in US politics can not be a natural outcome of US voting habits. The lack of diversity (and thus lack of democracy) is fully intentional.
- ifearthefeds 15y agoName five democratic or republican candidate who support changing the status quo so that it helps smaller parties.