• CH3DD4R_G0B-L1N@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    The path to get there would be a pretty big downside. Some of us would say worth it, but that’s a privileged position and likely one we’d regret. Big time rock and a hard place energy.

        • Grindl@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          Two parties is a design flaw of first past the post. There can be regional parties, and occasionally re-alignment elections, but the natural outcome of single member first past the post elections is two big-tent parties with roughly 50% of the seats each.

          You need proportional representation or multi-member districts to have more than two stable parties.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          Washington warned against political parities, period. The problems of first past the post creating a two party duopoly weren’t understood at the time.

          It’s not a very practical approach to nationwide electoral strategy, IMO. Washington himself was allied with Hamilton’s Federalist party in practice, even if he never officially declared for it.