By the very nature of our two-party political system, half the country is happy and half (OK, 48%) is down in the dumps.

Worse yet, a lot of Americans don’t even get the warm and fuzzies over their “own” party.

Source of the charts above, and other depressing ones, is this 2021 article from fivethirtyeight.com.

The system is broken.

Our current system increasingly produces candidates who represent the extreme views of our electorate. The moderate majority – the backbone of our nation – finds itself unrepresented and increasingly disillusioned. If we continue down this path, we risk falling into an abyss of hyperbolic partisan turmoil from which we may struggle to recover.

Can we please ditch the two party system, truly “drain the swamp” of PAC/lobbyist influence, and introduce ranked-choice voting that rewards moderates vs. extremists?

The Nonpartisan Top Five Open Primary would standardize our primary election process. All candidates, regardless of party affiliation, would appear on a single ballot, and all voters would have the opportunity to participate. This simple change would have profound effects. Voters would no longer be limited to candidates from a single party – if you like a Democratic candidate for one office and a Republican for another, you’d have that choice. The top five candidates from this primary would then move on to the general election.

This system would put an end to the systemic voter suppression that comes from requiring membership in a private organization (a political party) to participate in taxpayer-funded elections. It would return power to the voters in nominating candidates, decreasing the influence of party insiders while still allowing parties to endorse and promote candidates as they see fit. 

Importantly, it would increase the diversity of candidates, giving voters more choice and a better chance of finding representatives who truly reflect their values.

The general election would then use Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). This system is simple and intuitive, much like the choices we make every day. Voters can choose to vote for just one candidate or rank as many as they like. This allows people to vote their conscience without fear of “wasting” their vote or inadvertently helping a candidate they oppose. No longer would we be forced to choose the “lesser of two evils” – we could support the candidates we truly believe in.

RCV ensures that the winning candidate has the widest possible support. It has also been shown to reduce negative campaigning, as candidates have an incentive to appeal to a broader base rather than just energizing their core supporters. 

Perhaps most importantly, it promotes a more collaborative legislative process. When legislators know they can’t be easily “primaried” by more extreme candidates, they’re free to work across the aisle and find real solutions that benefit all Nevadans.

Both quotes above are from an op-ed piece by a self-described “conservative Republican lawyer” on ThisIsReno.com. (Emphasis in the 2nd quote is mine.) He was making the case for a state ballot issue called Question 3. It didn’t pass, sadly.

It shouldn’t be “us” vs. “them” but that’s where we are today. Even if you’re on the “winning” side, you’ll probably wind up with the short end of the stick, unless your name is Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos.

You’ve probably heard a lot about two-party systems this election season — with most of that chatter being about our two-party political system’s failure to benefit everyday Americans while upholding the elite few. You’d probably even agree that ANY two-party system, given enough time, will always result in two powerful “sides” that squelch innovation, pick arbitrary winners and losers and reduce your choices. Two-party systems are good for the parties who operate them and bad for everyone else.

(from this Rolling Stone article that’s actually about credit card companies)

The parties are lame. It’s time to go someplace better.