Where on political spectrum could third party come from?

[brucejoel99]

FPTP naturally levitates towards a two party system.

No.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_presidential_election,_2016

*bump*

Sorry, I know this thread hasn't been posted in for a year now, but I came across it & just had to counter this.

In political science, the tendency being referred to above, in which plurality-rule elections (such as FPTP) structured within single-member districts tends to favor a two-party system, is called Duverger's law.

Duverger actually didn't regard the principle as absolute, suggesting instead that plurality would act to delay the emergence of new political forces & would accelerate the elimination of weakening ones, whereas proportional representation would have the opposite effect.

Since 1987, the Philippines is seen as basically the only country whose politics run counter to Duverger's law, as the Philippines' governance structure changed repeatedly before 1987 & the country has many distinct social groups.

So... yes. FPTP does naturally levitate toward a two party system.

[brucejoel99]

We already have a Libertarian Party, a Green Party, and a Constitution Party. How many more parties do we need?

In other nations similar to us (G7) they have for the most part two parties that pass power back and forth just like we do, but for the most part they have third parties that play much much more relevant roles in places like Canada & the UK then they do here.

My question is - where on the political spectrum does anyone see the best likelihood emerging of a serious third party? It’s an interesting question. I think it’s safe to say what has stopped well intentioned people from perusing the formation of a third party in America is the idea that they will split the vote on one side of the spectrum guaranteeing a victory for the party on the other side.

[brucejoel99]

We already have a Libertarian Party, a Green Party, and a Constitution Party. How many more parties do we need?

In other nations similar to us (G7) they have for the most part two parties that pass power back and forth just like we do, but for the most part they have third parties that play much much more relevant roles in places like Canada & the UK then they do here.

My question is - where on the political spectrum does anyone see the best likelihood emerging of a serious third party? It’s an interesting question. I think it’s safe to say what has stopped well intentioned people from perusing the formation of a third party in America is the idea that they will split the vote on one side of the spectrum guaranteeing a victory for the party on the other side.

My point being that voters already do have alternatives to the two major parties and could be showing their dissatisfaction with those two by casting more votes for the other alternatives. But the two majors are still getting 97% of all the votes. I see on Facebook several articles by the Independent Voter Network proclaiming that more Americans self-identify as independents than as Republicans or Democrats. But if that were true, why is there so obviously a high percentage of American voters who are voting straight-party tickets? I think if there were a need for a third large party, many voters could simply "take over" the Libertarians, the Greens, or the Constitutions and, by their greater numbers, make sure that the party has a mainstream platform and message rather than a fringe platform and message. I think the system still has an effectively free market, not as closed as IVN makes it out to be, and there is ample opportunity for another party to become a large third party if there were a market for it. There isn't.

You're acting as if the question asked was "How do we get a serious third party to emerge?". That's not the question. The question was "Where on the political spectrum does anyone see the best likelihood emerging of a serious third party?," regardless of its likelihood (or lack thereof).