• stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    what’s the problem with a plurality? in other countries this happens all the time and parties need to work together (i think this is called a coalition) to reach a majority

    • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemm.eeM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There’s no problem with it, but the US has been tricked into believing there is a problem with it to perpetuate the supremecy of the main two parties. That’s my POV at least ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it’s widely considered “throwing your vote away”, people don’t do it, and it never happens. Plus I believe since the president is voted for as an individual, then it’s first past the post. You can’t have a coalition president. The whole system is setup to create a false dichotomy.

      Wait till you hear about the enormous number of people that don’t vote at all. I believe if “nobody” was an option, and the non-voters were considered, then nobody would’ve won at all in the last couple of elections. People know the system doesn’t care about them. It’s functionally not a democracy.