Far be it from me, its not my place...

Jun 2014
43,635
42,669
United States
#31
They allow points of view to be represented which are essentially ignored in a two-party system. Look at somewhere like Holland, with the most purely proportional electoral system in Europe. You go to vote there, and there's a good chance you can find a party that matches many of your political views. If you're a deranged Protestant extremist you can vote SGP; if you're a strict Christian who opposes gay marriage but are not totally batshit you can vote for the Chistian Union instead. Or if you're a fairly liberal and modern Christian there's the CDA. Or let's say you don't care about religion; your just a relatively liberal, centre-right kind of a guy - there's a party for you too. Maybe all you care about is stopping immigrants from coming to Holland - then vote PVV! Or if you think the most important thing is fighting the ideology of PVV voters; you can vote DENK! Are you a socialist? Well what sort? They've got options. And all these parties are represented in the States-General, along with others (including an animal rights party and a senior citizens' party).

To me, at least, this make much more sense than voting for one of two massive coalitions so unwieldly they can't actually represent anyone. Who do you vote for if you're a staunch opponent of gun control and a staunch supporter of extending Medicaid? If you want to keep immigrants out but are opposed to tax cuts for high earners?

The problem with having so many different entities making up the Parliament is that nothing gets done. So yeah... You can feel good about personally having voted for a party that closely represents your ideology, so long as you don't care about actual policy changes being implemented.
 
Nov 2007
1,558
655
Prague, Czech Republic
#33
The problem with having so many different entities making up the Parliament is that nothing gets done. So yeah... You can feel good about personally having voted for a party that closely represents your ideology, so long as you don't care about actual policy changes being implemented.
That's obviously not true, since things do happen in the Netherlands. It's a real place, not a theoretical concept.
 
Nov 2006
53,219
19,383
#35
They allow points of view to be represented which are essentially ignored in a two-party system. Look at somewhere like Holland, with the most purely proportional electoral system in Europe. You go to vote there, and there's a good chance you can find a party that matches many of your political views. If you're a deranged Protestant extremist you can vote SGP; if you're a strict Christian who opposes gay marriage but are not totally batshit you can vote for the Chistian Union instead. Or if you're a fairly liberal and modern Christian there's the CDA. Or let's say you don't care about religion; your just a relatively liberal, centre-right kind of a guy - there's a party for you too. Maybe all you care about is stopping immigrants from coming to Holland - then vote PVV! Or if you think the most important thing is fighting the ideology of PVV voters; you can vote DENK! Are you a socialist? Well what sort? They've got options. And all these parties are represented in the States-General, along with others (including an animal rights party and a senior citizens' party).

To me, at least, this make much more sense than voting for one of two massive coalitions so unwieldly they can't actually represent anyone. Who do you vote for if you're a staunch opponent of gun control and a staunch supporter of extending Medicaid? If you want to keep immigrants out but are opposed to tax cuts for high earners?
So with any luck a president can be elected with 20% of the vote? No thanks.
 
Nov 2007
1,558
655
Prague, Czech Republic
#37
Okay. Is the Netherlands the only nation on Earth with a Parliamentary form of government?
No, but it was the example I was using since it has a very proportional electoral system which allows a plethora of smaller parties to exist. Other parliamentary systems tend to have fewer parties, so your criticism would apply even less to them.

So with any luck a president can be elected with 20% of the vote? No thanks.
Such a ridiculous outcome could only happen with the kind of dysfunctional electoral system that exists in the US. That was the original point I was making - you can't turn America into a multiparty system by voting for a third-party candidate; because the voting system is structured to incentivise a two-party structure.
 
Likes: Rasselas

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
71,510
39,464
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
#38
No, but it was the example I was using since it has a very proportional electoral system which allows a plethora of smaller parties to exist.
Note, however, that the leading party has only 33 seats in the House of Representatives out of 150 (22%); and 13 seats in the Senate out of 75 (17%). Hardly representative of the entire country, especially where the next three parties down have even smaller percentages. While certainly coalitions - probably amongst pretty much the same parties, tend to ensure a more centrist approach to just about anything, it also makes it less likely the individual voices of the smaller parties will actually be heard, anyway. There will still effectively be a two-party system no matter how many parties are actually in existence.
Such a ridiculous outcome could only happen with the kind of dysfunctional electoral system that exists in the US. That was the original point I was making - you can't turn America into a multiparty system by voting for a third-party candidate; because the voting system is structured to incentivise a two-party structure.
It is structured that way on the theory that one votes for an individual to represent him (or the state) rather than a party, even though the system morphed into a system where people vote largely based on party anyway.
 
Nov 2006
53,219
19,383
#39
Such a ridiculous outcome could only happen with the kind of dysfunctional electoral system that exists in the US. That was the original point I was making - you can't turn America into a multiparty system by voting for a third-party candidate; because the voting system is structured to incentivise a two-party structure.
It is not at all a ridiculous outcome when you have a half dozen parties in the general election as you described. If you have say four different parties in the general election with three being rational and one being radical shitheads you might have a problem. I would not want to see someone win that the vast majority doesn't want.

Although I suppose you could have ballots where you must vote for all 4 candidates with number 1 being the guy you least likely would like to see win. Hey, that's not a bad idea.
 

Blueneck

Former Staff
Jun 2007
52,364
38,170
Ohio
#40

Similar Discussions