By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sc94597 said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

There is one major difference between the FPTP in Canada and the UK compared to the US: They're local elections while in the US, it's almost always entire states. I would agree with your assessment if the US had their states divided up into voting districts like in Maine for instance, but the way it is, entire states are just too big in weight for most voters to go off the GOP/Dem rails.

But like you said in the other post, if voters can make the choices themselves on how they would like to vote, then getting more equitable voting systems in place should be a real possibility, at least in those states that allow those.

House of Representative elections are not state-wide elections, nor are state-senators and state House of Representative/assembly elections, nor are local elections

Sure the Senate and Presidency are elected state-wide or through a system of fifty one (state + D.C) elections, but they are only two parts of the whole system.

Third parties and independents have won Senate seats in the past too, and two Senate seats are held by independents currently (Vermont - Bernie Sanders, and Maine - Angus King.) 

Sure but that doesn't matter in the US system. One party could technically own 100% of both House and Senate yet not win the presidential election. To make that matter, the presidential election would need to stop being a separate thing from either House of Senate election.

In fact, this could actually be done very easily: There are 538 electoral votes in total. There are 438 Representatives in the House plus 100 Senators in Congress. Just add up both houses by party affiliation and voila: A presidency elected by the result of many local elections, where smaller and regional parties actually have a fighting chance, ending the deadlock between just 2 parties.