What would be the best option to get more parties involved/elected in the USA?

[sethnintendo]

Adinnieken said:

sethnintendo said:

It is pretty obvious that most people are sick of the Democrats and Republicans in the USA.  However, I believe with the current winner takes all system that it is almost impossible for other parties to get elected in state and national elections.  If I wanted to vote libertarian or another party then my vote would most likely be worthless.  It would be nice to know that my vote actually means something rather than be tossed out.  I believe that we need to go from a winner takes all system to proportional representation.  I view the electoral college, winner takes all and two party systems in a very negative light.  I was wondering what you guys think would be the best way to solve this problem? 

We are not a winner-take-all system of government.

I was mainly referring to the winner takes all is how our elections are decided.  The winner of the election goes to office while the losers go home.  I would rather see a system where if a party gets 20% of the votes then they get about 20% of the seats (proportional representation).  This would ensure that almost everyone's vote actually does count.  If I vote for libertarian or green party and they only get 10-20% of the vote then my vote is worthless.  However, if they got 10-20% of the seats due to proportional representation then my vote actually mattered.

 

"The most common system, used in Canada, the lower house (Lok Sabha) in India, the United Kingdom, and most elections in the United States, is simple plurality, first-past-the-post or winner-takes-all"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurality_voting_system