# How all did the founding fathers screw up democracy, and what still needs to be done to fix it **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 20, 2024, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960 "2024-08-20T22:30:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/21 "2024-08-21T15:33:55Z")
> [@Beckdawrek](#): > > But, the 16yo voting age? Nope. > Our society of late has not aged like we did in the 20th century. They are younger by years. Quoted for truth, and because it makes a really good point. When the voting age was 21+, 16- and 18-year-olds were a lot more socially mature than they are now, in the sense of being willing and able to take on adult responsibilities. Physically, of course, their brains were still teen brains. Now, though, cultural adolescence can extend well into one’s 20s. Why is for another thread, but the point is that the voting age has always been a little bit arbitrary, first too old and now perhaps too young. I wouldn’t mind pushing the age downward, but I don’t think it would actually make much difference, much less solve any problems, particularly as both normal and bad actors seem to be upping their game in terms of influencing votes via social media etc. ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/22 "2024-08-21T17:02:09Z")
> [@penultima\_thule](#): > > Pennsylvania has, what 17 congressional districts? So rather than run 17 separate polls to get a different representative to your neighbour living across the road, merge them into a single multimember pan-state electorate. Makes sense even from an economic perspective. Declare the 17 representatives for Pennsylvania based on first past the post, or STV or proportionally. Whatever. There are even example of US States who do this now, so all hope is not lost. > > Non-merkins are continually amused by declarations of “… _I am from the great State of_ …” and “_I share my own States values of_ …”. But nobody says "_I am from the great 4th District of Texas and I live by the particular values of my district, as distinct from those godless infidels in adjoining 5th District … until the boundaries are redrawn_. However, lots and lots of people say they have different values and want different representatives than Those People living in Those Cities or That Backcountry. > [@kayaker](#): > > My son is employed by the prison system in Florida. His coworkers were vocally very much against giving felons the right to vote, while the prisoners in the system had no real interest in the idea. The issue AIUI is less about giving persons still serving their terms the right to vote (though I believe some states do), than about permanently banning people once convicted of felonies from voting, even after they’ve served their terms, finished any probation, and may have gone years without getting into any further trouble. Which AIUI some states do. > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > > [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > > > You had to be a land owning, tax paying, white male age 21+. As a result barely 5% of people were eligible to vote. > > This sounds bad by the standards of 2024. But let’s remember it was set up in 1789. > > The Americans were setting up a system that was significantly more progressive than the British one they were familiar with. And the British system was more progressive than pretty much all others. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: The history of the USA can be seen as a long, vehement, and sometimes bloody argument over what, exactly, it means to say “All [men] are created equal.” It mattered a very great deal that we started there; even though the people who first signed on to it didn’t mean by it anything by what we mean by it now. > [@LSLGuy](#): > > Starting at the extreme north end of a tall state or the extreme west end of a long state, salami-slice across the long axis _exactly_ EW or NS respectively across the full width / height of the state respectively Have you looked at the shape of New York State? And your lines are going to run into major problems with significant geographic features, making it difficult for some people to get to the polls; and will chop coherent communities into bits (though I don’t know whether that’s your intention). ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/23 "2024-08-21T17:19:16Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > What is actually missing from US politics is any political gravity towards the center. I disagree. I consider myself a centrist (although I realize many extremists also consider themselves centrists). I’m a Democrat and I feel the Democrats are a coalition of the center and the left-wing. This is why the Republicans put so much effort into voter suppression; they know the Democrats represent the majority. ---
**Author:** ![jjakucyk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3d9bf3/32.png) [@jjakucyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjakucyk)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/24 "2024-08-21T18:58:19Z")
CGP Grey’s take on fixing gerrymandering is an interesting one, though I don’t know how it would work in practice. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/Mky11UJb9AY/maxresdefault.jpg "Gerrymandering Explained") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mky11UJb9AY) ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Wiggler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/red_wiggler/32/13190_2.png) [@Red\_Wiggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Wiggler)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/25 "2024-08-21T20:38:15Z")
I understand how Canada determines its ridings but what I’m talking about is how population density variations within state borders make it nearly impossible to accurately represent voters in many states. I think a fitty-fitty state like Wisconsin or North Carolina should have close to a fitty-fitty House delegation and we can’t do that with single member districts because of where the electorate groups itself. Btw, Canada has its own problems with its electorate being fairly representative. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/26 "2024-08-21T22:04:17Z")
One obvious point of reform is campaign finance. It’s legally and politically impossible at this point, but ideally I’d do something like publicly-provided campaign funds for anyone who can gather more than a minimum amount of support, and outlaw private campaign funding. > [@LSLGuy](#): > > What is actually missing from US politics is any political gravity towards the center. On the contrary, one of our problems is that there’s far too much, the Republicans have been able to drag the Democrats farther and farther right for decades in the name of “centrism”. Resulting in a political system composed the center-right Democrats and the far right Republicans and not much else. We need to recognize that “centrism” is immoral and self-destructive when the fanatics show up. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/27 "2024-08-21T22:25:30Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Anyone who thinks this will make voting more accessible has never worked a job that wasn’t 9-5 Monday to Friday. The rest of us don’t get a day off work just because the government says today is special. Exactly. People that want this do not understand working. > [@Chad\_Sudan](#): > > It’s only thanks to the Founding Fathers that we can hope to modify and improve on the system of government they established. They set it up that way and wanted us to do so. > > If we find it difficult or impossible to make those reforms in practice, that is the fault of people living in our own era. Right. > [@kayaker](#): > > My son is employed by the prison system in Florida. His coworkers were vocally very much against giving felons the right to vote, while the prisoners in the system had no real interest in the idea. Since the MAGAS want only in person voting, how would that work anyway? > [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#): > > I agree with this. They created the most successful nation in the past 250 years with opportunities and civil liberties that have been a model for others. Exactly. > [@jjakucyk](#): > > Which benefits small (low-population) states. Fine, that’s kind of the whole point. Some states wanted equal representation regardless of population, other states wanted representation based on population. The “have their cake and eat it too” solution was to break up the legislature into two chambers, one which represents states equally, and one which represents states based on population, then give them equal powers. That’s brilliant. It was brilliant and a nice compromise. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/28 "2024-08-21T22:42:55Z")
> [@DPRK](#): > > You mean like this? No. Every slice line would run exactly east-west (in a tall state like CA). Not perpendicular to the border azimuth at the place where a slice line meets the border. ---
**Author:** ![jjakucyk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3d9bf3/32.png) [@jjakucyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjakucyk)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/29 "2024-08-21T23:01:03Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > It was brilliant and a nice compromise. In concept yes, but in execution it’s biased in a way that it shouldn’t be. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/30 "2024-08-21T23:05:00Z")
> [@jjakucyk](#): > > In concept yes, but in execution it’s biased in a way that it shouldn’t be. Or so people in large states think. Talk to someone in Maine and ask them. _"Yeah, well, you know, that’s just , like, your opinion , man.’_ ’ ---
**Author:** ![jjakucyk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3d9bf3/32.png) [@jjakucyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjakucyk)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/31 "2024-08-21T23:23:28Z")
Sure the people of Maine like it because it gives them privilege. But the point was that the Senate gives small states their say, and the House gives big states their say. Yet the Senate, House, AND Electoral College ALL preference states like Maine. How is that fair? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/32 "2024-08-21T23:32:27Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Talk to someone in Maine and ask them. There were probably plenty of white voters who were happy when black people couldn’t vote. There were probably plenty of men who were happy when women couldn’t vote. And there are probably plenty of voters in small states like Maine or Wyoming who are happy with having a vote two or three times times the size of a California voter’s. But finding people who are happy with being the beneficiary of an unfair system is not justification for that system. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2024, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/33 "2024-08-22T00:06:19Z")
> [@penultima\_thule](#): > > These "nobody"s of whom you speak would be exclusively American, no? Lots of other democracies recognise the implications in terms of frustration and ill-allocated resource caused by disproportional representation and have national, non-partisan bodies to oversee and deliberate and determine equitable electoral boundaries. But American problems must require American solutions. > > And even if it was not possible to see through American eyes what non-gerrymandered district boundaries would look like, the issue can be eliminated at a state level. Pennsylvania has, what 17 congressional districts? So rather than run 17 separate polls to get a different representative to your neighbour living across the road, merge them into a single multimember pan-state electorate. Makes sense even from an economic perspective. Declare the 17 representatives for Pennsylvania based on first past the post, or STV or proportionally. Whatever. There are even example of US States who do this now, so all hope is not lost. Gerrymandering is not uniquely an (US) American problem; France in particular has had notable problems with the ruling party redrawing electoral districts. What _is_ unique about the United States is the strong institutional regression to a two party system that exists almost everywhere (even though not explicitly ensconced in law), and the polarization that often allows one party to dominate local and state politics for decades with little effective resistance. Propotional representation through some kind of proportional ranked choice voting system might break the logjam slightly but frankly it isn’t as if there are many areas where even the long standing third parties like Libertarian or Green parties would command more than single digit percentages even if aggregated statewide. And when the issue comes up in surveys, American voters like having direct representation by a specific representative rather than representatives at large because it gives less influential areas like rural districts or downmarket cities dedicated representation where they might otherwise be overlooked. The urban/rural divide is far more pronounced in the United States than almost any other industrialized nation that has fair elections which drives a lot of politics and the current polarization. Which is not to say that a lot of obvious gerrymandering can’t be addressed by statute ‘cures’ (the courts have been generally reluctant, with some cause, to weigh in), but it isn’t as if there is one fully objective standard to what ‘fair’ voting districts have to look like. But setting that aside, the fact is that when people complain about “gerrymandering” they often have very different views of what that means, or what a ‘fair’ apportion would look like, even when the districts are drawn by nonpartisan (or at least bipartisan) teams following some set of explicit critiera, because what they are really complaining about is not getting the best possible advantage for their “team”. And while gerrymandering on the national scale via a concerted plan by the GOP is a relatively recent phenomenon, historically it has actually been the Democratic party (city ‘political machines’ in the industrialized Northern cities, Dixiecrats in the South) which engaged in gerrymandering, albeit generally being more about maintaining local control than influencing national elections. Again, take a look at the [FiveThirtyEight.com](http://FiveThirtyEight.com) Gerrymandering Project; they did a really good exploration of why it is such a pernecious problem and how difficult it is to come up with a set of objective critiera to prevent gerrymandering that everybody will agree to, even if they aren’t being disingenuous. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2024, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/34 "2024-08-22T01:45:36Z")
> [@jjakucyk](#): > > Sure the people of Maine like it because it gives them privilege. But the point was that the Senate gives small states their say, and the House gives big states their say. Yet the Senate, House, AND Electoral College ALL preference states like Maine. No, Maine gets two house votes, exactly right for their population. the only states that might get too many are the few 1 vote states.And even then you’d have to look at their population first. An yes Maine get privilege- but so doe California. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2024, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/35 "2024-08-22T02:48:31Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > An yes Maine get privilege- but so doe California. Since when? California barely matters nationally except as a punching bag whenever the Republicans get into power it’s so marginalized. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2024, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/36 "2024-08-22T02:55:10Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Since when? California It has the most House votes- and thus the most EC votes by far. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2024, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/37 "2024-08-22T03:17:43Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Propotional representation through some kind of proportional ranked choice voting system might break the logjam slightly but frankly it isn’t as if there are many areas where even the long standing third parties like Libertarian or Green parties would command more than single digit percentages even if aggregated statewide. In a discussion where it’s a given that the gaming forces of first past the post will produce a two party state, I feel like this statement is akin to saying about Philo Farnsworth’s invention, “Sure, the TV seems like a neat idea but, when you think about it, it to him decades to create it, cost him many fortunes, it’s black and white, and the image is all fuzzy and weird. Clearly, that thing will go nowhere and never get better.” I have no love of the small parties and I would never recommend proportional representation, but it seems strange to think that, after moving to a proportional system, that somehow that would have no effect on the landscape as time moved on. Of course, yes, five minutes after the Constitutional Amendment was passed, the Green party would be too small to even appear in the Senate. That doesn’t tell us a thing about what it would look like 30 years later. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2024, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/38 "2024-08-22T03:33:56Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Again, take a look at the [FiveThirtyEight.com](http://FiveThirtyEight.com) Gerrymandering Project; they did a really good exploration of why it is such a pernecious problem and how difficult it is to come up with a set of objective critiera to prevent gerrymandering that everybody will agree to, even if they aren’t being disingenuous. The problem is that there’s no general agreement on what a fair system should look like. Consider New York. As a whole the state is roughly 55% Democratic and 45% Republican. We have twenty-six congressional districts. Does that mean that we should have fourteen “Democratic” districts and twelve “Republican” districts? Or does it means we should have twenty-six districts, each of which is 55% Democratic and 45% Republican? Which is the fair standard we should be aiming for? ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2024, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/39 "2024-08-22T04:03:23Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I have no love of the small parties and I would never recommend proportional representation, but it seems strange to think that, after moving to a proportional system, that somehow that would have no effect on the landscape as time moved on. > > Of course, yes, five minutes after the Constitutional Amendment was passed, the Green party would be too small to even appear in the Senate. That doesn’t tell us a thing about what it would look like 30 years later. Third parties have had effects on elections in the past (T. Roosevelt’s “Bull Moose Party”, Ross Perot’s “Reform Party”), and we’ve even had a couple of major shifts in the political landscape (albeit essentially one party morphing into a successor organization with similar underpinnings) ; however, the problem with expanding party influence today is twofold; one is that the standing alternative parties are purpose-designed to appeal to a fringe demographic interested in a narrow set of policy areas, and the second is that the major parties have so courted corporate and ‘dark money’ interests (and serve them very well regardless of which one is in control of the White House or Congress) that alternate parties are at a massive campaign disadvantage by default. If the advantages of campaign war chests were removed or at least attenuated, and the alternative parties could draw enough influence to force coalition governance, then we could see a viable multiparty spectrum that might actually be more representative of general public opinion. But I think that getting money out of politics would be even more difficult than Constitutional reforms. > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The problem is that there’s no general agreement on what a fair system should look like. > > Consider New York. As a whole the state is roughly 55% Democratic and 45% Republican. We have twenty-six congressional districts. Does that mean that we should have fourteen “Democratic” districts and twelve “Republican” districts? Or does it means we should have twenty-six districts, each of which is 55% Democratic and 45% Republican? Which is the fair standard we should be aiming for? That’s it in a nutshell, and applying a requirement to “maximize” competitiveness intrinsically creates conflicts. But when you see some of the tortured boundaries of electoral districts with areas connected by conduits tens of feet wide, it is obvious that there is some serious shit-fuckery going on that has nothing to do with any kind of fairness or balance. Frankly, the fairest thing might just to have an algorithm draw a rough grid across a state and psuedo-randomly iterate adjustments to the boundaries until each has approximately the same number of people regardless of political affiliation. You’ll end up with concentrations of mostly liberal urban voters and big swaths of mostly conservative rural voters, but then, that is reflective of the actual demographics. Any decisions made with human judgement, regardless of how “non-partisan” the composition, is always going to be subject to complaints about bias and corruption even if there is no evidence to support those claims. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2024, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960/40 "2024-08-22T08:00:54Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > In a discussion where it’s a given that the gaming forces of first past the post will produce a two party state, I feel like this statement is akin to saying about Philo Farnsworth’s invention, “Sure, the TV seems like a neat idea but, when you think about it, it to him decades to create it, cost him many fortunes, it’s black and white, and the image is all fuzzy and weird. Clearly, that thing will go nowhere and never get better.” > > I have no love of the small parties and I would never recommend proportional representation, but it seems strange to think that, after moving to a proportional system, that somehow that would have no effect on the landscape as time moved on. Yeah; the present third parties are all shaped by the fact that everyone _knows_ they are locked out of power by the two-party system. So no serious politician who wants to actually get elected is likely to actually join one, making them a haven for crazies, extremists and the self-indulgently irrelevant. Anyone who wants actual power will join one of the big two. In a system where third parties could actually gain real power, their character would change drastically as people who actually expect to get into power and enact their agendas joined them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-all-did-the-founding-fathers-screw-up-democracy-and-what-still-needs-to-be-done-to-fix-it/1005960.md?page=3)