Two-party system vs more options — VoteSharp’s perspective

There are now 12 versions of Dr. Pepper… 12. A flavor for every taste! You can even customize vehicles down to the thread color of the seams. So, why -- in the United States, home to 17 kinds of Doritos -- do we still have a two party system? It not only limits choice in elections, but limits any nuance from discussion in all the various issues, from national defense to poverty policy.

Whatever the reason, the rush to expand choices and offer mass customization to meet voracious consumer appetites has not caught up to the political sphere. Public policy tends to lag behind trends (and for good reason), but in the case of political parties, we are a dozen decades behind other democracies.

While voters were working hard to raise families and grow businesses, the two major parties became strong enough to set up the system to ensure their own job security. Functionally, only the most engaged voters participate in primary elections. Some states have open primaries where party affiliation is not required in order to vote and a voter can select which party’s primary ballot they wish to vote, Republican or Democrat. Many states have closed primaries where only those voters registered with the Republican party can vote the Republican ticket and vice versa. 

Rather than a party primary, some states subvert the voters altogether by sending candidates to a caucus system where party activists choose which candidates proceed to the general election. These tactics reinforce extremes ensuring the candidate which most appeals to the base (because that’s who votes) wins the primary. This ensures the extremes from each party meet in the general election. When the far ends of the political spectrum vote in primaries or hand pick their candidates via caucus, and the only options in the general election are extremes on either side, why are we surprised when those on the extreme ends are elected?

"However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion." - George Washington, 1796, Farewell Address

In the 2020 documentary film, Boys State, about the American Legion’s annual election simulation with 11,000 17-year old Texas boys who aspire to be politicians, we see first hand how the two party system forms its ideologies by committee, and then marginalizes the individual opinions and personalities of each elected leader -- to the point where one of the two “Presidential” candidates admits he doesn’t believe in several of his party’s positions on key issues, but knew he had to agree with them in order to get elected to represent that party.  

In many states, non-Republican/Democrat candidates (3rd parties or independent/unaffiliated voters) skip the primary system altogether and are first seen on the general election ballot. However, without the structural and financial support of a well-entrenched party, most fail to gain traction and critical mass to be anything more than a spoiler.

So what can be done?

  1. Get more of the 80% of those of us somewhere in the political middle to vote in primaries. We’ve tried this for decades and it works from time to time, but those who aren’t politically passionate don’t stay engaged over time.
  2. Consider actions Australia has taken with government “carrots” for voting (free bar-b-que at the polls aka “democracy sausages”) and “sticks” (fines of $80 AUD) for not voting.
  3. Require parties to pay for the cost of partisan primary elections.
  4. Hold “jungle” primaries – exactly the same as are held for many nonpartisan municipal elections – where the top two vote-getters proceed to the general election, regardless of party affiliation.
  5. Support community efforts and nonprofits like Democracy Works  who aim to get more people to not only vote, but to be informed voters.

In conclusion...

The current system incentivizes black and white thinking and voting. We are an increasingly gray population, whether it be voting blocks, culture, race, environment, or the economy. Even within the parties, few would admit to adhering to every plank of a Platform. Plenty of Republicans are budget and national security hawks while being more libertarian about social issues like LGBTQ+. 

From a population demographics perspective, we are increasingly more multi-racial and inherently more multicultural as religions and traditions are influenced by this convergence of peoples. Allowing two parties to polarize debates and elections isn’t serving our melting pot nation.  

At VoteSharp we believe choice is a good thing, and that there is latent demand for nuance in politics. Amplifying the nuance of your own opinion on political issues is something we can help with, and we can improve your relationships with voters across the spectrum - from your base to your opposition.