Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 15 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Can We End the Two-Party System?

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   1 comment, 2 series
Become a Premium Member Would you like to know how many people have read this article? Or how reputable the author is? Simply sign up for a Advocate premium membership and you'll automatically see this data on every article. Plus a lot more, too.
Author 1890
Message Paul Cohen

While searching for opinions about answers to this question I found mostly promotions for adopting Instant Runoff Voting (IRV). This is a widespread notion and the argument for it is largely that this voting system does dispense with the spoiler effect and it does assuage the feelings of voters who want to vote for someone not from the two dominant parties. But it is less than clear that this would put an end to the polarized two-party duopoly. It seems more likely that these votes, no matter how satisfyingly cast, will simply be converted to votes to one of the two dominant parties. Ranked voting generally and IRV in particular have been discussed repeatedly and from many different perspectives, in earlier articles.

One promotions for IRV that I discovered was from The Institute for Political Innovation. While I am very skeptical of their choice of voting method, we do agree in believing that the polarized two-party duopoly needs to go. We also seem to have come up with the number five as a reasonable number of candidates to stand in the final election; this seems like enough candidates to allow voters a choice without expecting voters to become familiar with a bewildering number of candidates. An earlier preliminary election can be used to winnow down the candidates to five or so.

In earlier articles of this series we have repeatedly demonstrated how balanced approval voting (BAV) will put an end to the polarized two-party duopoly (see for example a recent article or a very early one). But a careful reading of the argument reveals that what would be ended is a polarized, two-party duopoly. Voters in favor of the candidate for one of the two dominant parties, because of the polarization, will choose to vote against the candidate from the other dominant party (provided the voting system permits that). That surely is critical to the argument. BAV puts an end to the two-party duopoly due to polarization and that leaves open the question of whether there could be a two-party system that is not polarized. In such a system, many voters would simply prefer, or at least find acceptable, a win by either of the two dominant parties.

(Image by Pixabay: suju-foto)
  Details   DMCA

If that were to happen, it would seem to imply that the two parties have nearly identical agendas and that agenda is shared by the voters. The question then arises whether this could possibly become a stable situation? Would divisive issues that divide the parties never arise? Moreover, if this unlikely situation did arise how harmful would it be?


Rate It | View Ratings

Paul Cohen Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

A concerned citizen and former mathematician/engineer now retired and living in rural Maine.
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Who Pays Taxes?

What Could be Wrong with Ranked-Choice Voting?

Liberate Yourself from the Mainstream Media

What Might be the Best Voting System?

Conservatives Without Conscience

Rethinking Which Voting System is Best


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments

Paul Cohen

Become a Fan
Author 1890
(Member since Jun 15, 2006), 3 fans, 86 articles, 29 quicklinks, 1279 comments, 12 diaries (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

The only way we can hope to adopt a better voting system is through a bottom-up process. It has to begin at the state or local level through a citizen initiative. Maine has done this recently and there are efforts in Taiwan, Oakland and in Boulder Colorado. No doubt there are other efforts as well and that is a start.

If you understand the potential of BAV to improve our democracy, you can do your part to help others learn about it. Again, this is just the kind of effort that is needed, starting by building a demand from ordinary citizens. The existing system works for our politicians and for the most part they are not going to take the lead in demanding change. The same can be said for the mainstream media.

Submitted on Saturday, Oct 16, 2021 at 10:05:32 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Flag This
Share Comment More Sharing          
Commenter Blocking?

Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment