The only thing that can fracture the two party system is ranked choice or alternative voting systems. FPTP guarantees two parties.
The problem is that FPTP massively benefits democrats and republicans so they’re unlikely to want to vote against it. So, to get it passed you’d need to get a third party in power that doesn’t benefit from FPTP. But, you can’t get a third party in power because FPTP makes it virtually impossible to elect third party candidates.
It’s a catch-22 situation.
In Canada the Liberal party made an election promise that they would scrap FPTP if elected. They’re one of two main parties in Canada, along with the Conservatives. Of course, as soon as they won the election, they backed out of that promise.
And I can’t wait. I am firmly in support of ranked choice. I think it’s absence is the root cause of a lot of issues and should be a single issue voter issue… second ONLY to the fact that there is a “candidate” in the running who is responsible for a Temu quality coup.
Again (not for you but others), I know the issues of my party. It’s my party not my religion. I am uncomfortable with the compromises democrats make. The thing about coalition governments and multi-party systems is they allow compromises to happen while keeping support and acknowledging they are compromises in the name of pragmatism. It’s the way it should be, it’s how we get the best of all ideas.
There are things that should never be compromised. I’m a libertarian because Obama was in favor of “strong civil unions”, renewed the patriot act, and kept Guantanamo open. In a coalition government, I maybe could have understood that, but that’s the issue: without a coalition, and without ranked choice, those are now principles of the democratic party.
And again, it’s all secondary to being able to vote at all in 2028. Harris is going to have a hell of a time, but I’m excited for it.
In the the absence of Ranked Choice, we likely would need to get involved at the Primary level in order to fundamentally change the party. Primary turnout rates are like 10% or something absurdly low.
that is not the correct analysis. the correct analysis is that strategic voting in a fptp system leads to party consolidation. the solution is values voting
