Democrats vs. Republicans vs. Populists vs. Progressives vs. Socialists

[Chrispi]

Some thoughts on the uniqueness of the US electoral system

I think that the main reason the two-party system is so strong is because of the Electoral College, which is essentially first-past-the-post squared, so the likelyhood of a two-party system is that much greater, and unlike the House of Commons, the Electoral College cannot bring down a president in a vote of no confidence, so there's no use for smaller parties.

The second feature of the US system is the straight-party ticket. Because there are dozens of choices to be made on Election Day (president on down to dog catcher, you might say) many people choose the party vote to simplify matters, only voting for the few candidates outside the voter's party when needed.

Thus, even in probably the most diverse political culture in the world, you get stuck with the good ol' two-party system (or as I call it the Janus Party .) I think that this multipartisan ATL is only possible using PR; without it, it would either degenerate into our system or collapse in civil war.

 

[reformer]

Civil War is a bit exstreme. The president would get less powerful, states would gain more power. Congress would become a hotbed for changing coalitions. Yes, it may be more unlikel without perportional reppresentation, but during the turn of the century you had the political players who may have been able to achieve it. After a few House of Reppresentatives elections, it would eventualy sink into normallcy, with congressional elections becoming more important in the public eye. Almost a parlimentary system.

 

[Alise]

Ok, No clue what the POD would be, but Imagine this:

Democrats: Party of the South. Always wins south, never gets anywhere anywhere else.

Republicans: Party of the middle class and upper class. Win sometimes in New England, and in some midwestern and western states.

Populists: Party of agriculture and small government. Not very racist or southern, so not a part of the Democratic Party, but a natural ally. Does poorly in the House, but has stronger reppresentation in the senate. Wins elsections in the west and midwest.

Socialists: Party of the more exstreme workers, especially European Immigrants. Powerful in very cenered urban areas. Has severall congressman, but very few senators. Has the support of most unions

Progressive Party: Party of the traditional white worker. Anti Immigration because of the want to increase wages by illiminating cheep labor. Becomes more moderate as to win votes in the middle class do to loosing some workers' votes to the Socialists. If it weren't for the socialists, they might actualy gain controll. As is, they are merely a force in congress, with some reppresentation in the senate. Do to the Socialist-Progressive competion, the Republicans often win elections in the industrial north.

All legeslation would have to be passed with coalitions. The logical temporary coalitons would be, on economic and foreign policy Democrats-Populists, the socialists and the Republicans would be against each other at all times, making the Progressives the swing vote.

Social issues, Democrats by themselves most of the time, Republicans-Populists, Progressives-Socialists. Chances are that the Democrats would become the swing vote, giving the south power over civil rights issues and prohibition, among other things.

The presidency would become much less important because the victor would never have majority. Philibustering would become a very common fact of life. Very little legislation would make it through, making states more powerful. The increasing power of states may actualy eventualy give the Populists an edge, allowing them to either take over the Democrats or the Republicans. Chances are the socialists would become the main liberal party, and the Progressives would either colapse or become a party of the center. Then the more radical socialists may become Communists, breaking the left into three parts, same as the right, making the Progressive party either the ultimate swing vote, or, if it colapses, America would become a corpse.

Clearly the POD is in the 1890s. I'm thinking Bryan doen't get nominated by the Dems, joins the Populists, and congress becomes a three way coalition needing entity. Democrats, loosing any hold they had in the Mid-West, revert to their old southern ways to please their constituency. Trying to please the Populists for coalition purposes, the Republicans become more anti-labor and perhaps more isolationist. TR is getting nowhere there, so he joins the small progressive movement (in OTL it is also a Republican splitoff) and is of course a very popular politician, and maybe even gets the presidency one of the terms. (no one would ever of course get more than one term) With the Progressives being more center and less liberal, many workers jump into bed with Debs. Roosevelt eventualy decides to become a little more liberal in order to gain political help from the socialists, and becasue his constituency was more liberal than he was. Chances are eventualy FDR would follow in TR's footsteps, and take over the Progressives. Can't see him going fully socialist or Populist. Taft and the 20s Republicans would probably stay republicans. Al Smith might actualy become a urban populist, which would be a growing popularity movement for smaller government intervention in big cities that gains the support of some disgruntled Socialists and Progressives.

Wilson doesn't fit anywhere, so politicaly he probably dies. A little too progressive for the south.

Really, if there would be more political parties, the victor of presidential elections would never have a majority. People should not be divided into two parts, because it can cause tough political confrontations as it was on the elections in 2016. Most of the people supported Trump then, and still believe him nowadays, but another part is completely dissatisfied with his politics and continue to organize protests. The election in 2016 is still in my memory; I even have a game on my iPhone, called

MOD EDIT

dedicated to those hot race. I often play it, because I like politics in a game more than in real life as it is true and can't be falsified.

 

[Dante]

" Most of the people supported Trump then, and still believe him nowadays, but another part is completely dissatisfied with his politics and continue to organize protests."

Most of the people did not support him, he failed to win the popular vote, his opponent actually received almost 3 million more votes then him. Also his approval rating is hovering around 40%, so no the majority does not approve of him. This is the danger of the Electoral College, it allows a candidate who the majority of people actively voted against to become president if they win certain strategic states. It's one of the least democratic features of our government.

 

[CalBear]

Now THIS is violating the dead!