Democratic Primaries
In reply to the discussion: Who Needs Russians When You Have 'Justice Democrats' [View all]LiberalLovinLug
(14,682 posts)Maybe its just that Americans have had a two party system for so long, with the two parties colluding sometimes in order to keep it that way, that most can't even comprehend other parties having a greater ability to compete. But its a very odd outlook coming from someone outside your country. Most western style democratic states have more than two parties. That is what a flourishing and open democracy looks like.
A type of Proportional Representation, as opposed to the electoral college, would ensure that the same percent of people that voted for a party, would get that same representation in the legislature. (Hillary with 3 million more votes would have taken it) It would also eliminate jerrymandering type results. The beauty is that a third pary, or fouth party, can't give the Republicans, for instance, a win by default. If say, 10% vote Green, and 10% vote Libertarian, they'd each have 10% of the elected officials representing them.
Then, yes, Democrats might have to negotiate with Greens to write and pass bills. Welcome to the rest of the world. The key benifit would not be to Democrats per say, but to progressives in general. The alternative might be that those votes, in a first-past-the-post system would have gone to a Republican instead.
As the system stands now, Greens, or any third party becomes the enemy. But a PR system would eliminate that threat. They would turn into an ally party.
The other added benefit is that more people would be encouraged to actually vote, if they knew that their vote counted. ie...if a Red State always goes R because of first-past-the-post before, but now if 40% of the state votes D, then that State receives 40% of D representation, instead of zero. And if a Greenie or two also slip in? Great! its good to have new ideas from outside box.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided