Is a Third party/Multi party system better than a two party?

[The Spook Who Sat By The Door]

Here in the US a genuine two party system would be a good starting point instead of this one party sham we've got going. However, I must admit that the Democrats and Republicans deserve some admiration for the shear diabolical genius of it all!

From my non-American viewpoint, the 2 US parties are considerably different, especially after Trump became the head of the Republican party. Maybe there were closer the previous decade, but right now there's a stark difference between Democrat and Republican voters

The key word in your response is "VOTERS". I'm talking about Party leadership and policy.

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

The Strengthened Parliamentary system is the best for the whole world. Empowering a single man will do nothing but ensure dictatorship and easy manipulation.

[Mercatus]

We either need lots of parties or no parties, because typically voters have to compromise on their views in a two party system.

[Rodella]

We either need lots of parties or no parties, because typically voters have to compromise on their views in a two party system.

I kinda agree with this. Having nonpartisan elections would make elections less hectic. Divisiveness in politics might be near nonexistent. One thing I wonder is what kinda other parties would even be included in a multiparty system? I would think Libertarians, but some of their views are a little too wacky for some people.

[Farnhamia]

We either need lots of parties or no parties, because typically voters have to compromise on their views in a two party system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_p ... ted_States ... You're welcome.

[Salus Maior]

The Strengthened Parliamentary system is the best for the whole world. Empowering a single man will do nothing but ensure dictatorship and easy manipulation.

You mean like Erdogan?

[Salus Maior]

We either need lots of parties or no parties, because typically voters have to compromise on their views in a two party system.

As much as I would agree with good ol' George on the evils of parties, they're inevitable. Most simply and fundamentally because people who always come to disagreements.

[Resilient Acceleration]

To be honest, it will depend on the party structure. Speaking from personal experience, almost all political party here are either:

1. Owned completely by a large organization –arguably a parallel state– with its own paramilitary forces and school network, or
2. An absolute monarchy with a hereditary leadership that determines literally everything, or
3. A despotic dictatorship personally owned by a ridiculously rich coal and media tycoon, or
4. A corporation with a "general meeting of shareholders" where leadership is entirely determined by how much money you can raise for the party, with literally zero public involvement.

And given a choice between America's bipartisan system and this cartel quagmire of near-zero ideological differences between parties (except in terms of religious issues), I'd still say the American system is far more democratic due to the existence of primaries and, well, different ideologies between parties.

The emergence of such party is not impossible in America. Trump's rumoured Patriot Party, for example, will probably take form of no. (2).

[Mercatus]

We either need lots of parties or no parties, because typically voters have to compromise on their views in a two party system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_p ... ted_States ... You're welcome.

It sort of counts, but the fact that none of those parties are invited to the debate stage means that we essentially still have a two-party system in America.

Only then will I have a chance at having my dream of a libertarian government realized.

[Aogensokyo]

I think that a wider variety of candidates to choose from is optimal for a well-functioning democracy.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Yeah. Though the tendency of multiple parties to form a majority coalition which persists over elections is a bit disturbing. All those minority views are being directly represented, which is good, but the longer the situation continues the more I worry about the views which are only represented in 'opposition'.

Perhaps single-issue parties are the key. With no left/right preference maybe a few of them together (or just one if it's a big issue like Abolish the Payroll Tax and they have 10% of the reps) would get more of what they want by voting with the opposition. And they wouldn't care that now the (previous) majority consider them dogs, because they've done something on their Single Issue and after serving their term they'll be off to farm alpacas or something.

[Middle Barael]

I always state that a two party system is just one party away from a one party system.

The good thing about no party having more than 50% of the seats in parliament is that they have to make compromises. This takes the sharper edges off everyone's platform.

And the best way to reach a state where no party has more than 50% is by having more than two parties in parliament.

3, 4,5,6 parties is good.

More than 10 and it becomes quite impractical in getting a majority coalition.

I do wonder, what would be the 2 other parties in America if it was a Multi party system?

You’d likely have a Centrist party, as well as a more DemSoc/SocDem/Progressive Party, and the Greens would be much more successful albeit more moderate. You could also see the Republicans give way to a MAGA Party, and perhaps you’d see racial parties as well like an African-American Rights party or Latino interests Party.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

I do wonder, what would be the 2 other parties in America if it was a Multi party system?

You’d likely have a Centrist party, as well as a more DemSoc/SocDem/Progressive Party, and the Greens would be much more successful albeit more moderate. You could also see the Republicans give way to a MAGA Party, and perhaps you’d see racial parties as well like an African-American Rights party or Latino interests Party.

Eventually, maybe. The voters would take a long time to get their heads around "I can vote for who I actually want, without helping the party I want least" ie the fear of vote-splitting. I think there would still be a big Dem showing, and a fairly big GOP showing, with the most dissatisfied voters peeling off to the left and right. The Greens would do badly, as their Social Justice supporters would leave to found/join the Socialist Progressive Party, but maybe that would finally move them to where I think they should be: a Global Warming Centrist Party.

I think the dead hand of Two Party would run the show for a good while. Even mature multi-party systems often have one quite large party, and I think both the US parties will want to be that one. With the money they can raise, literally buying out minor party candidates would be an option.

[Thermodolia]

Ooh calm down there lad(!)

I'm not the biggest fan of Multi party I support more of a Third party... we shouldn't have party for every citizen to be honest. There should be a left, right, and a centrist party.

There should be as many parties as people can think of