Do we really want Lyndon LaRouche, Ross Perot or Ralph Nader dictating conditions to the people who actually won a plurality of votes? Oh please, what this would do is reduce the power of party leaders and force them to compromise to get things done. People voted them all in and they'd all have a voice, and if they're willing to work together to get things done then so much the better. Will it be perfect? Of course not. Will it be better than what we have now? By leaps and bounds.
The political party system has survived because the parties themselves have either evolved over time or given way to other political parties. They've survived because our system encourages it and because they've solidified their power, and the result is the corruption of both. Because of this it's going to be next to impossible to enact something like this but a man can dream.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 19/4/10 18:01 (UTC)Oh please, what this would do is reduce the power of party leaders and force them to compromise to get things done. People voted them all in and they'd all have a voice, and if they're willing to work together to get things done then so much the better. Will it be perfect? Of course not. Will it be better than what we have now? By leaps and bounds.
The political party system has survived because the parties themselves have either evolved over time or given way to other political parties.
They've survived because our system encourages it and because they've solidified their power, and the result is the corruption of both. Because of this it's going to be next to impossible to enact something like this but a man can dream.