Zardnaar
Deity
Here in New Zealand we have proportional representation. Put simply the popular vote determines the make up of parliment. If you get 51% of the vote. We still have the two big parties, and since 1996 when we introduced MMP neither party has passed 50%. This means coalitions are the norm.
Anyway liberals in America think that if they had proportional representation you could have everything they want. Up to a point this is kind of true. Hilary would have won and 2016. But and there's always a but what happens is the following.
1. The main parties fragment.
2. Things get dragged towards the centre.
Broadly speaking you have enough room for a far right and left party, a centre right/left and maybe one in the centre.
Here the minor parties come an go, the greens are reasonably long lasting standing independently since 1999.
Fragments occurred when various fragments broke off. Labour spawned two break away parties, New Labour and ACT(neo liberal free market right wing) while National spawned one NZ First. . They also both spawned a center party United Future.
New Labour formed the Alliance with 4 or 5 minor parties outside government (from memory Greens,Democrats New Labour, and a Maori party)
So in 1996 after elections we had the two big parties, United, ACT, NZ First and the Alliance in power. The alliance fragmented again into two parties the Greens and another one. and United Future was eventually reduced to an electorate MP.
Most of the small parties were lead by big men with electorate s who left the established parties. They got old and left parliament over the years with one left. The Greens went with dual leadership and focused more on party votes. ACT is down to an electorate MP so we now have 4 parties two left wing one right wing and one centre part very slightly to the right but they coalitioned withe the left wing parties (Greens+Labour).
Elections are mostly decided by who can bribe the middle class or smaller parties.
In American terms each big party would have 3 or 4 potential smaller parties. Each would be based on the main factions of each party. Any somewhat charismatic person in the party with an axe to grind and a seat would be a potential break away.
For the Democrats an obvious one would be Bernie plus AOC and her friends for a progressive wing while the Democrats would be left of center. On the right the GoP could fragment along the conservative caucus, moderates and governor's governor's like Kasich. Assuming a pre or post Trump world.
It's also not impossible a few would leave both parties which means never one can govern alone. The Republicans are more United than the Democrats but electoral defeat would probably blow that up.
Either way if you trend to far left or right usually over 3 terms you get binned out. On the plus side you don't get Hardline left or right parties and it seems to keep populism in check as parties can't really get hijacked by those in safe seats.
Anyway liberals in America think that if they had proportional representation you could have everything they want. Up to a point this is kind of true. Hilary would have won and 2016. But and there's always a but what happens is the following.
1. The main parties fragment.
2. Things get dragged towards the centre.
Broadly speaking you have enough room for a far right and left party, a centre right/left and maybe one in the centre.
Here the minor parties come an go, the greens are reasonably long lasting standing independently since 1999.
Fragments occurred when various fragments broke off. Labour spawned two break away parties, New Labour and ACT(neo liberal free market right wing) while National spawned one NZ First. . They also both spawned a center party United Future.
New Labour formed the Alliance with 4 or 5 minor parties outside government (from memory Greens,Democrats New Labour, and a Maori party)
So in 1996 after elections we had the two big parties, United, ACT, NZ First and the Alliance in power. The alliance fragmented again into two parties the Greens and another one. and United Future was eventually reduced to an electorate MP.
Most of the small parties were lead by big men with electorate s who left the established parties. They got old and left parliament over the years with one left. The Greens went with dual leadership and focused more on party votes. ACT is down to an electorate MP so we now have 4 parties two left wing one right wing and one centre part very slightly to the right but they coalitioned withe the left wing parties (Greens+Labour).
Elections are mostly decided by who can bribe the middle class or smaller parties.
In American terms each big party would have 3 or 4 potential smaller parties. Each would be based on the main factions of each party. Any somewhat charismatic person in the party with an axe to grind and a seat would be a potential break away.
For the Democrats an obvious one would be Bernie plus AOC and her friends for a progressive wing while the Democrats would be left of center. On the right the GoP could fragment along the conservative caucus, moderates and governor's governor's like Kasich. Assuming a pre or post Trump world.
It's also not impossible a few would leave both parties which means never one can govern alone. The Republicans are more United than the Democrats but electoral defeat would probably blow that up.
Either way if you trend to far left or right usually over 3 terms you get binned out. On the plus side you don't get Hardline left or right parties and it seems to keep populism in check as parties can't really get hijacked by those in safe seats.
Last edited:
