• squid_slime@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    As another European it is difficult to see the Americans constantly fight over voting. The two party system is definitely the issue here.

    Either way well said.

    • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Technically, the Two Party system isn’t actually a thing. It is instead simply the work of Market Forces. Multiple competitors in any market, shall result in that market being split between two competitors and an also ran. Then Market Power, if abused, shall prevent any actual competition to the duopoly. Something truly disruptive is required to change that. ATM the US has a pair of more or less captured political parties market. They are in no way an official part of the Government. Nothing in the Constitution empowers them. They should have no power at all. No say in who runs nor any influence beyond whatever PR for issues they advocate. However, they worked out how to make getting elected very profitable, and thus very expensive. Rather quickly money called all the shots. Then the manipulated monster these very wealthy and connected folks created to get elected, lost their minds because a “them” got elected President, and the “useful idiot” they brought in to pacify things with some good Fascism, turned out to be in multiple pockets and beholden to no one but himself. There is your US Political History tldr;

      • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        Technically, the Two Party system isn’t actually a thing.

        Nothing in the Constitution empowers them.

        This part is kind of inaccurate. Because of the constitution, we use first past the post voting, which naturally devolves into a two party system. It’s like trying to build a sky scraper out of just wood. The blueprints don’t explicitly call for it to collapse, but because of the chosen materials, it is bound to happen.

        While the rest of what you said is true though.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Technically, the Two Party system isn’t actually a thing. It is instead simply the work of Market Forces.

        It’s also Article 2 of the Constitution. To wit:

        The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President

        That last part being the main reason there’s an Either / Or in elections, e.g. two parties. Getting to First-Past-The-Post whether via electors or total popular vote turns out to be difficult for some reason. And to your point, yes, money is a major, as they say, bitch.

        • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Which would indeed be why it is technically, not a thing. See the natural outcome of a thing is not necessarily the intent of the thing. The two party system is as you say. But that isn’t the design of the Constitutional language. It is the design of humans themselves.