I suppose I support 'that one'

[lordandrei]

Believe it or not, I'm really not for a bipartisan system. Everytime I hear the phrase, "I reach across the aisle" it really makes me sick. The truth is, the reasons behind saying the system is broken aren't the real reasons

Comments

So, what would you want?

[fraterseraphino]

If you are not for a bipartisan system, what would you replace it with if you were king for a day?

Re: So, what would you want?

[lordandrei]

3 party system and Hare-Clark voting for starters.

3 partys to mirror the original idea of a 3 ring circus...err system for checks and balances

Re: So, what would you want?

[fraterseraphino]

Why 3? Wny not 'N', where 'N' is relatively unbounded, like the parliamentary systems used by Great Britain or Israel?

I mean, with 3 you almost guarantee that a coalition government will need to be formed for a majority government to take power in Congress. (Most congressional party heads, and in a parliamentary government, the selection of the Prime Minister, is done by majority party control.)

Re: So, what would you want?

[lordandrei]

In general I dislike the pluralism that our gov't is based almost entirely on. The partisan system seems to have locked legislation into our side vs. your side. The entire election process is transformed into root for the good guys and despise the bad guys.

At least in a plus 2 system there is the chance that one group may side with different groups on issues. I'm fine with N. Unfortunately, I don't know if there is any way to dig our system out of where it is now.

Re: So, what would you want?

[fraterseraphino]

Well, and the interesting part with a parliamentary system such as the one used in Italy (where N is large) is the fact that while nearly every position is represented by a party. Yet, once their parliament is seated, parliament necessarily has to organize itself into a 'government' by the different parties forming a coalition into a majority ruling government and into a minority "loyal opposition