ucim wrote:To illustrate, consider a spherical cow.
The population is split 52% green, 48% yellow. There are five major issues to be decided each year, and on each of them greens want (100%) high, and yellows want (100%) low. Without considering voting systems, gerrymandering, electoral colleges, and any other methods of allocating voting power, what outcome would best match the overall will of the populace?
a: 100% of the time, on every issue, high wins.
b: 52% of the time, on every issue, high wins.
c: 100% of the time, on 52% of the issues, high wins.
Your example is subtly, but deeply flawed. I want a system where red, orange, blue, purple, brown, white, and black are also viable options. (the key here being viable
) The two party system IS the problem.
I do not 100% agree with the Democratic party. I do not 100% disagree with the Democratic party.
I do not 100% agree with the Republican party. I do not 100% disagree with the Republican party.
Right now, the parties are controlled by the partisans. Primaries ensure that moderate politicians don't make it to the general election because moderates are less likely to vote in primaries, so the winning candidate primarily has to please extremists in the party. There has been great talk since 2010 (maybe earlier, but that's when I first remember hearing much about it) about "primarying" a politician who is insufficiently pure according to the most extreme partisans. The majority in the middle are the ones who are unrepresented.
If I vote for a third party, I know they won't win, and I increase the chances that the candidate that I dislike
more will win. I'm tired of voting for the lesser evil. This past presidential election was an especially good example of how terrible the two party system is. Both major parties nominated deeply
flawed candidates, but there was no reasonable alternative. Vote for Gary Johnson or Jill Stein? Congratulations, you just wasted your vote and increased the chances of the greater evil winning.
My method: Some variety of multiple winner system for the House (so that Democrats in Wyoming and Republicans in Vermont have someone
to represent their interests, and some variety of Condorcet method for the senate and presidency. I'd also stop using state boundaries when creating house and senate districts.
No, I have no illusions of my plans surviving contact with the enemy (the entrenched political parties/establishment). Still, it's nice to dream sometimes.