If the NYT thinks it’s a good idea, then I don’t.
The problem is that it is all one big unipary corruptocracy.
In other countries one can see big parties manipulating the smaller ones in coalitions.
OR
You're forced to form your coalition after the election in proportional representation systems like you often see in European countries.
I prefer the former to the latter because it forces the parties/candidates to answer much more specifically about what their policies will be if elected. In the latter systems the largest party might have to roll over and give up policy making on this key issue or that in order to bring a minority party into the coalition so as to achieve a minority. That really sucks if you voted for that larger party thinking they were going to have one policy on an issue that was really important to you only to see that handed over to another party you did not vote for which might have a very different policy than the one you wanted.
and yes, I know politicians frequently lie and break their promises to voters and do not do what they said they were going to. That's true in all systems.
Maybe the problem is not the two party system but what the universal chattering class has turned it into. Mirror time, idiots.
With a well-informed, well-educated, highly engaged electorate, either “two-party” or “multi-party” democracy would work.
(And yes, I know America is a constitutional republic... but that’s a form of democracy.)
The part of the system that is broken is We The People. Far too few of us actually PARTICIPATE in our self-government. We’re too busy chasing after our livelihood and our entertainment to make self-government a priority.
Even Theodore Roosevelt was unable to win under a third party banner. The others, from La Follette in 1924 to Perot in 1992 and 1996, are just footnotes in almanacs. The best hope is for THE MAGA movement to steadily eliminate moderates from Republican ranks.
Term limits.
If you want more representative government, repeal the 17th, and cap the number of people that each congressional rep can represent at some low number like 25,000 or 50,000 so the size of the House grows to stadium size and each house seat is more responsive and representative to individual constituents.
The NYT doesn’t want that though. They want a Congress that will punish Trump and fund wars in Ukraine.
Maybe they should fix New York’s one party system and their corrupt judicial system first.
What the USA really needs <-> MAGA
Our systems need to be rationally designed to work well.
The country needs to be broken up.
Uniform taxation on corporations to pay off the national debt is what is needed.
Imagine 50 states each offering to be a better place to live and work, and fully empowered to make things work.
Now that the GOP controls both houses is it a "problem". Wasn't such a problem when Nazi PeeLousy and her lapdog DemoTards ran things.
In Europe’s multi party system, the leadership of each party controls who gets to run under their party.
In the US’s primary system, an outsider like Trump, if he gets enough signatures, can get on the primary ballot, and win the nomination, even if the party establishment hates him (as they did with Trump).
We need to focus more on primaries.
Whaaa we losing. We have to change the system to make it work for us again. Typical Alt Leftist clowns.
No thanks. All a multi party system does is give disproportionate power to a small minority party to play majority maker
The key to understanding the problem is stated in my Tagline.