I’ve heard it said 1000 times that the US is 2 party political system, but I just don’t understand what mechanisms push it to be that way? Why are 3rd parties so weak or unlikely?
In: Other
A combination of the electoral setup and of incumbent protectionism. I’ll address both.
* The US uses “first past the post” elections, so that in each district, a legislator has to defeat the others to be elected. Chances of election are mathematically highest when you coalesce into two parties, each trying to get over 50%. If you have three or more parties, the setup is unstable, as joining another faction that is kinda similar to you puts you closer to power than trying to win a race against 2, 3, 4, 5 other parties. (If you had 3 parties, each pulling one-third of the vote, a person could could move over to another party and ensure victory; since political views are a spectrum, it wouldn’t be giving up that much ideologically.) As a result, people have coalesced into coalitions, each of which captures around half the people. (Swing voters are pretty rare, percentagewise.)
* The two existing parties have, over the decades, made it so that it’s much easier to win if you’re one of the two incumbents. Elected officials get money to “communicate with constituents” but that means free campaigning; same for presidential travel. Parties that get more than 5% of the vote are automatically eligible to be on the next ballot in most states, while third parties have to spend massive money gathering signatures in every election cycle. Etc etc. Removing these obstacles would probably result in more third parties at the local level; hard to imagine it on the national level, given point #1.
Latest Answers