304

NPR:

Amid growing frustration with both major political parties, voters are open to some big changes.

A new poll, commissioned by supporters of election reforms and shared with NPR, shows there is significant support for upending winner-take-all U.S. House… Continue reading

The post “Voters are sick of the 2-party system. A new poll shows they’re open to big changes” appeared first on Election Law Blog.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Ranked choice voting open to all.

[-] nexguy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Hey Democrats and Republicans, will you allow for the possible destruction of your parties? No? ...oh

[-] Wataba@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago

Remind me which party is the one that wants to send armed enforcers to voting places?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] InvalidName2@lemmy.zip 2 points 19 hours ago

One of the biggest issues I see on the ground is that voters aren't stepping up. This is even at the local level. This is a problem all across the USA. Good people aren't willing to run for a lot of these local offices. Nobody's preparing the next generation / replacements to take over once older candidates age out or move up the chain. Then even if you get multiple people to run for a local office, these voters who are supposedly tired of the 2 party system don't volunteer, donate, or even bother to show up to events where the candidates are making themselves available for dialog. They aren't interacting with candidates' social media. So realistically, if voters don't change, nothing's going to change about the 2-party system.

[-] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

The 2 party system only works for business and power. We need a system that works for the people.

[-] Folstar@lemmus.org 3 points 23 hours ago

Yes, these are the types of structural changes that need to be made before all the wishful thinking guiding people's voting behaviors can amount to anything positive. Looking at the current landscape, ranked choice specifically, Democrats are receptive to the idea because they want leftists to at least put Democrats second while the GOP hates the idea so much they're passing laws per-emptively banning ranked choice for more or less the same reason. There's the path forward.

[-] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 1 day ago
[-] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 1 points 21 hours ago

RCV is just one of many alternative voting systems that has alot of warts. I think there are better options that should be explored:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison/_of/_electoral/_systems

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop%5C&v=O-dzK3YIAf8

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] beep@piefed.world 1 points 20 hours ago
[-] Fishnoodle@lemmy.world 46 points 1 day ago

We're also open to executing politicians for treason when they hold more allegiance to money and Israel than the people they represent.

Like seriously NPR. Clean it up a bit and ask that fucking question. Report on how many people you interview agree with that sentiment.

Report on actual sentiment.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

Never gonna happen. The duopoly is never gonna allow it.

[-] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 3 points 1 day ago

This can be done on local level but on national level you would need constitutional reform which is extremely unlikely.

[-] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago

Nonsense. The constitution grants states almost complete control over the handling of national elections. There's nothing stopping them from doing ranked choice for president/Congress.

[-] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 19 hours ago

You're technically right but the real issue is electoral college. For ranked choice to work on national level you would have to get rid of if. Which would require constitutional reform. Without it ranked choice and winner-take-all electoral college would result in a big mess. The most likely scenario would be for Republicans to organize and vote for one candidate while Democrats would split the vote between establishment Dem and some DSA candidate. To actually end 2-party system without giving the presidency to Republicans forever you would need ranked choice popular vote or 2-turn elections.

[-] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago

The electoral collage only applies to the presidency, though. The power of Congress matches or exceeds that of the president. It would make a huge difference in which senators/representatives are elected.

Two parties? Who is the second party?

[-] jrTug_2T@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 23 hours ago

The two-party system in the United States consists of "Republicans" and "Everyone else".

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 8 points 1 day ago

"Evil Light" I think.

[-] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

I prefer Bob Loblaw's Law Blog

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

You, sir, are a mouthful.

[-] Xanthobilly@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

They’re open to big changes because corporations have captured our political parties and neither party answers to the population, you know, like a functional democracy. Citizens United and deregulation of corporations is where things went wrong.

[-] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

Our de facto two party system isn't statutory. It's not written in the constitution that there can only be two parties. It's just the natural consequence of a winner-take-all, first-past-the-post election system. All a candidate has to do is win 51% of the votes to get 100% of the political power. It makes third party candidates essentially nonviable. That's what would need to change if we want to ditch the two party system.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2026
304 points (98.7% liked)

politics

30740 readers
2577 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS