• @SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    545 months ago

    You guys wouldn’t have this clusterfuck if you just had a parliamentary system. Don’t like the non-reactionary liberal candidate? Great, just vote for whoever else you like, and even if they don’t win, they can still join efforts with the lesser evil to make sure the far right doesn’t return to power. It also has the added benefit that it doesn’t force the whole right wing of the country to cater to the rabid reactionaries on the rise, because those just make a different party that has to balance the distribution of their power with their less mad allies.

    • @Ross_audio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      545 months ago

      You’re talking about a proportionally representative parliamentary system.

      The UK has a parliamentary system and it’s still just as possible for the opposition to be entirely powerless for 5 years at a time.

      First past the post voting. That’s the problem.

      Parliamentary or not. The actual voting system is the problem.

    • Ann Archy
      link
      fedilink
      75 months ago

      Who would have thought having more than two choices for who governs a country of 330 million with a nuclear arsenal would be a smart thing…

    • @Foofighter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      55 months ago

      This is the key issue with the US system. People and parties complain about gerrymandering but the party in power only changes the map to profit in the next election instead of establishing a democratic system where every vote counts the same. It’s the same issue in Germany with direct mandates, which allow absolute minority parties to be represented in the parliament.

    • BarqsHasBite
      link
      fedilink
      15 months ago

      Parliamentary is still First Past The Post for members of parliament. The PM is effectively the leader of the biggest party (yes lots of caveats but that’s how it plays out).