Two Party System

[tsubaki_sanjuro]

QUOTE (HSharp @ Aug 29 2012, 11:21 AM) To be honest I'm not a fan of any party system. What I would like to see in the UK is independent MPs who can truly represent their constituents in parliament as opposed to being in a party and doing what the party says. I would also like constituents be able to vote out MPs if they have no confidence in them, either in voting or petition.

For positions on Cabinet MPs will vote on who for what post including PM.

Now this system will already be met by naysayers who will say that nothing will get done as everyone will be for different interests but if that is the way the country feels (as MPs will actually be representatives of their constituents rather then making their constituents unofficial members of their party) then there might be a reason why there is mixed opposition on certain issues so the proposal should be re-assessed or re-worked to make it feasible for the public to accept.

The government is supposed to work for us, not us for it yet they are Big Brother who watch us, protect us and keep us ignorant of what they do.

TBH the above is probably un-necessary, all that would be required is to break the hold of the national party machines and return as power to the local party associations - ie: no national fundraising, advertizing or donations, donations can only be made by constituents (or companies based in the constituency) to local MPs or PPCs, and no whipping once in Parliament. The formation of a government could then be left to MPs coming together under much more ad-hoc groups than presently, as happened during the late 18th and 19th centuries when the weakness of that system resulted in many longstanding abuses (rotten boroughs, corruption in government, slavery, lack of political representation, restrictions on catholics, the corn laws, free trade etc) being (admittedly gradually) corrected, the standards of british government raised to considerable heights, and the overall quality of politics and politicians improved.

A return to the old convention that an MP had to stand for re-election upon being selected as a minister would also be welcome, it would massively thin out the government whip (all the PPSes would be $#@!ed off for a start).

[lexaal]

The idea behind a two party system is that elections are won in the political "center" of the societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_voter_theorem.

But if two parties suck.. the two-party-system sucks. In a many party system there is always some place for reasonably politics, but on the other hand crazy minorities often become part of the gouvernment. It is often better but there are also examples that is creates a lot of problems and instability (e.g. israel, italy).
Also a disadvantage is that the gouvernment composition is decided in negotiations, not by the elections (at least only on a second-hand level). And tif here is a small but balance shifting party between two big blocks it is very likely that their political interests get overemphasized during that process.

So overall the quality of a political system depends more on the people in leadership positions and less on the overall system.

[lexaal]

QUOTE (raumvogel @ Aug 29 2012, 02:35 PM) For some reason Jimmy has taken on the task of re-posting Elzam's comments isn the largest size possible!

sublimal message.

[Duckwarrior]

UK politicians need to be elected via an X Factor type competition, since that is the only thing that 90% of our iPhone wielding population of sheople have any interest in.

"I can't decide, I'm going to put it to the public vote." Would see the largest electoral turn-out ever.

[Duckwarrior]

And why are they called Political PARTIES? They are the most un-partylike groups of people that I can possibly imagine. If I turned up to join a party and found it to be populated by the likes of William Hague or Ed Balls, I would quick smart demand my bottle of Liebfraumilch back so I could go on a twatting spree with it amongst the attendees.

[Raveen]

QUOTE (lexaal @ Aug 29 2012, 10:24 PM) The idea behind a two party system is that elections are won in the political "center" of the societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_voter_theorem.

Whilst the election is won in the centre, when you form a government it is formed with that centre as an outlier. Basically the central position of the government does not reflect the central position of the electorate.

QUOTE (lexaal @ Aug 29 2012, 10:24 PM) But if two parties suck.. the two-party-system sucks.

There's also what happens when one party sucks which is almost worse. No choice is not better than two bad choices. Particularly if you're picking between mediocre and incompetent.

QUOTE (lexaal @ Aug 29 2012, 10:24 PM) In a many party system there is always some place for reasonably politics, but on the other hand crazy minorities often become part of the gouvernment. It is often better but there are also examples that is creates a lot of problems and instability (e.g. israel, italy).
Also a disadvantage is that the gouvernment composition is decided in negotiations, not by the elections (at least only on a second-hand level). And tif here is a small but balance shifting party between two big blocks it is very likely that their political interests get overemphasized during that process.

Does the final government accurately represent the electoral decision of the voters though? That's my thesis as far as it goes, that you end up with something more representative. The fact that it also tends to be self defeating and prone to total collapse is an unfortunate side effect

[fuzzylunkin1]

Competition just brings out the worst in people.

[HSharp]

QUOTE (Raveen @ Aug 30 2012, 08:18 AM) Whilst the election is won in the centre, when you form a government it is formed with that centre as an outlier. Basically the central position of the government does not reflect the central position of the electorate.

I'm guessing the reasoning for that is although swing votes are important the majority of votes come from the regular supporters who will always vote for the same party, as there is no proper way to determine who is the swing voter and who isn't you can't accurately describe whether the government is representing the electorate.

Although in another way you can as you need 50%> of votes to get in power which means marginal victories can mean up to 49.99999999% of the population will not be represented effectively in government but that is regardless of a two party or multi-party system.

[Adept]

Personally I think I would either be rebelling or falling into apathy if I lived in a two-party system. The Lib-Dems have correctly identified what the first thin that needs changing in the UK system is, but they failed to get it through due to Tory sabotage. They should have walked out of the coalition then and there

The US needs a third party that is dedicated to changing the system, and almost nothing else. I suspect the USA will rather collapse than change at this point though. Reps/Dems are too entrenched, and the people don't know of anything better.

[HSharp]

Honestly I'm disappointed by the Lib Dems, I will probably vote Green next time.

The main thing that disappointed me was the complete U-Turn on Uni Fee's even though they signed a declaration saying they would vote against it. Yes politicians lie but this was the biggest breach of integrity when it was a signed promise, I lost faith in all those MP's who signed and then voted for increased tuition fee's, personally I feel they should be impeached.