# If America had a multiparty system, wouldn't moderates rule? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 28, 2013, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448 "2013-08-28T23:18:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/21 "2013-08-29T02:35:14Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > And as a conservative, living in the district of a Blue Dog Democrat, I can tell you that I consider him a moderate, not a conservative, and that’s pretty much the view of all the conservatives I know. That’s because the Tea Party has moved the goalposts. Blue Dog Democrats when they were formed in the '90s were so conservative that when the Republicans won Congress in 1994, they wasted little time in switching parties. Calling their stance the “moderate” stance now just shows you how the press and the public has bought in to the constant barrage of the Republican propaganda machine. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/22 "2013-08-29T02:38:00Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Blue Dog Democrats are not moderates. They’re conservatives. On fact, many of them were so conservative that they became among the mist conservative Republicans. The most conservative Democrat in Congress right now is more liberal than the most liberal Republican. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/23 "2013-08-29T02:41:23Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > The most conservative Democrat in Congress right now is more liberal than the most liberal Republican. Yes, so? That’s because many of the Blue Dog Democrats _switched parties_. “Blue Dog” is a term from the 1990s, when there were Democrats well to the right of many Republicans. It has almost no meaning now. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/24 "2013-08-29T02:42:28Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Blue Dog Democrats are not moderates. They’re conservatives. On fact, many of them were so conservative that they became among the mist conservative Republicans. [url=]RationalWiki sez, FWIW: > [@](#): > > **Internal factions** > > While the Democrats have a substantial liberal wing among the public at large, the party’s inability to coordinate itself properly results in a political platform that consists of rolling over to Republican schemes and failing to provide effective leadership. The sectarian violence appears below. > > **Progressive Democrats** > European-styled social democrats. In the House they are organized in the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), the largest in the House of Representatives. Some are descendants of the New Left: > \*Sherrod Brown > \*Howard Dean > > - Keith Ellison > - Russ Feingold (the only Senator to vote against the original manifestation of the \* PATRIOT Act) > \*Barney Frank > \*Kucinich > \*Barbara Lee > \*Jim McDermott > \*Cynthia McKinney > \*Bernie Sanders (self-described socialist; not a Democrat, but caucuses with them) > \*Pete Stark (the first openly atheist member of Congress[4]) > > **Traditional liberals** > Constitute half of the voter base, and take pain to avoid infighting between the separate Democratic coalitions. Centre-left, and don’t share many differences with the progressives anyway: > \*Joe Biden > \*Barbara Boxer > \*Kirsten Gillibrand > \*The Kennedys > \*John Kerry > \*Nancy Pelosi > \*Jay Rockefeller > \*Elizabeth Warren > \*Anthony Weiner > > **New Democrats** > The Third Way moderates. They’ve increased their clout since the Dems’ neoliberal exploits since the 90s. Roughly equivalent to the British New Labour. Represented by the New Democrat Coalition (an affiliate of the Democratic Leadership Council): > \*The Clintons > > - John Edwards > - Dianne Feinstein > - Al Gore > - Joe Lieberman (independent since 2006) > - Some random black guy[5] > - Harry Reid > - Debbie Wasserman Schultz > > **Blue Dogs** > Here’s where the shit starts to break out. Those in the Blue Dog Coalition are often accused of being DINOs, siding with conservative thought whenever they wish, most commonly on social issues and deficit hawkery. Officially they are a coalition in the House but a few ideologically aligned Senators are listed as well. They’re typically elected in Jesusland, and are considered flaming lefties there: > > - Joe Donnelly > - Mary Landrieu > - Gabrielle Giffords > - Joe Manchin > - Ben Nelson > - Collin Peterson > - Heath Shuler > > **Dixiecrat leftovers and boll weevils** > To the right of the Blue Dogs. Not a significant feature in the party anymore, although occasionally one will turn up here and there as a failed Senate candidate, or a centrist Democrat will go haywire and swing far to the right.[6] > > - Virgil Goode (left the Democrats in 2000, was the Constitution Party presidential nominee in 2012) > - Zell Miller > > **Random populists** > These often vote with the progressive and traditional liberal wings of the party, but have their conservative quirky bits. Not easily categorized elsewhere: > > - Jon Tester > - Jim Webb > > **The libertarians** > Yes, they exist too, probably upset about Dubya’s stance on civil liberties and the Republicans’ constant juggling between pro-business interests and the Religious Right: > > - Mike Gravel > - There is also an erstwhile “Democratic Freedom Caucus” influenced by Georgism whose actual influence in the party is negligible. Based on the above divisions, I would envision the Progressives and maybe half the Liberals going to the Moonbats; the Dixiecrats to the Wingnuts; the Libertarians to the LP; the New Democrats, Blue Dogs, and the other half the Liberals to the Mugwumps; Populists wherever. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/25 "2013-08-29T02:48:29Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Brain, > > That’s an interesting article. I’m not sure what makes you think it’s “better” than self-ID, but … whatever. You seem to think that the right-wing party will be limited to just ~10% of the electorate. I’m not convinced your article supports that theory (if that’s the argument you’re trying to make). It would if every typology-group were a separate party, but I’m not assuming that. I’m thinking the Wingnuts would form around a Staunch Conservative core that would recruit some Libertarians, some Main Street Republicans, some Disaffecteds – **no** Postmoderns, they go with the Mugwumps – but a minority of each group, and I still don’t see it absorbing more than a third of the electorate, probably less. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/26 "2013-08-29T02:48:29Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > “Blue Dog” is a term from the 1990s, when there were Democrats well to the right of many Republicans. It has almost no meaning now. Ummm … no. They didn’t retire the label, like some super-star’s jersey number. It’s still in use today. [Cite](http://www.bluedogdems.com/content/about): > [@](#): > > Currently, the Blue Dog Coalition is comprised of 14 conservative and moderate members who represent every corner of the country and … [blah blah blah] ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/27 "2013-08-29T02:51:00Z")
BrainGlutton, you’re a good man and I love you and I love RationalWiki, but please stop quoting that fucking article every time someone brings up party composition. It’s just some shit that someone decided sounded good. It isn’t a valid source for anything. I mean, why the fuck should I accept it as an authority? And, by the way, guys like Ben Nelson would comfortably fit into the _right_ wing of the Republican party. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/28 "2013-08-29T02:52:05Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Ummm … no. They didn’t retire the label, like some super-star’s jersey number. It’s still in use today. [Cite](http://www.bluedogdems.com/content/about): It’s in use today as a relic of a time when it had meaning. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/29 "2013-08-29T03:02:42Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > It’s in use today as a relic of a time when it had meaning. 4 years ago, 54 Democrats called themselves “Blue Dogs” and they were a factor in the negotiations on ObamaCare. Calling it a meaningless “relic” might make you feel better, but it’s not accurate. ---
**Author:** ![penultima\_thule](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penultima_thule/32/3833_2.png) [@penultima\_thule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/penultima_thule)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/30 "2013-08-29T03:24:44Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I’ve often argued on this board that a multiparty political system would be better for America than the two-party system we have almost always (in different formations) had, and that our winner-take-all single-member-district electoral system naturally produces. “When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers”. > [@](#): > > Most of the world’s democracies post-WWII have PR and multiparty systems, and none has yet gone communist or fascist as a result. A more important question is whether multiple parties and attendent minority government deliver better governance rather than their ideology. That’s far from clear. > [@](#): > > We could have a multiparty system if we adopted proportional representation, instant-runoff voting and electoral fusion. Certainly the first fosters plurality, the second does not. Am unfamiliar with the third but it has the essense of preferencing, which can be benign or be manipulated to either ensure or obliterate minor parties. The near inevitable result of minority government is (IMHO) is inertia with all parties having excessive capability to blame shift any and all shortcomings. You have a car with a lawn mower engine and Rolls Royce brakes. Now this might well be suited to the US viewpoint of government. Experience on this side of the puddle would be it is better to make a clear choice, allow them (nea expect them) to deliver on their platform with conviction, not compromise, and when what they deliver is not longer the majority view chuck 'em out. Repeat periodically and the centre gets it’s way most of the time, and sometime the dragon wins. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/31 "2013-08-29T03:55:07Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > And, by the way, guys like Ben Nelson would comfortably fit into the _right_ wing of the Republican party. We’re talking about the same Ben Nelson that voted for ObamaCare, right? The ObamaCare bill that not a single Republican Senator supported? I’m not sure you know where the right wing of the Republican party is … ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/32 "2013-08-29T11:16:52Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > And, by the way, guys like Ben Nelson would comfortably fit into the _right_ wing of the Republican party. The American Conservative Union, when they put out their 2012 Congressional scorecard, gave Ben Nelson a 20, meaning that he voted their way on flagged bills 20% of the time. His lifetime score with them is 42.93% In comparison, the two most liberal Republicans in the Senate in 2012, Susan Collins and Olympia Snow, have lifetime ratings of 48.10 and 48.85. respectively. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/33 "2013-08-29T11:45:09Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > We’re talking about the same Ben Nelson that voted for ObamaCare, right? The ObamaCare bill that not a single Republican Senator supported? I’m not sure you know where the right wing of the Republican party is … The same Ben Nelson who extracted significant concessions for the private sector, by the way (Omaha being home to some large insurance companies). If anything he drove the bill further right from the original Heritage Foundation version. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/34 "2013-08-29T12:37:11Z")
I support this [del]Pitting[/del] proposal. BTW, American democracy has “evolved” to the point where a majority of voters is not 51%, but rather _just 8% of voters have control_ – and usually the most lunatic 8% ! A party with 60% of the seats in House of Representatives is controlled, due to the “Hastert rule,” by its crankiest 60%-sized subset. They were elected from a 60%-Republican District where the real selection was in the Primary election, where they needed only 60% (usually the most moronic 60%) of exclusively GOP voters. Less than 60% of eligible voters (usually more radical) bothered to vote in the primary. 60% x 60% x 60% x 60% x 60% = 8%. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/35 "2013-08-29T15:52:24Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > As a liberal, my impression is that when the democrats win they govern based on the agenda of the most conservative democrats and when the republicans win they govern based on the agenda of the most conservative republicans. For whatever reason our politics is to the right of our elections and opinion polls on policy. I don’t think that would change in a multi-party system. I think a lot of it happens due to tighter party discipline on the part of the GOP- rank and file centrists have a lot more pressure applied to vote the party line than the equivalent Democrats. So as a result, everything kind of shifts rightward. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/36 "2013-08-29T16:24:50Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > BrainGlutton, you’re a good man and I love you and I love RationalWiki, but please stop quoting that fucking article every time someone brings up party composition. Absolutely not. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/37 "2013-08-29T22:44:29Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > The same Ben Nelson who extracted significant concessions for the private sector, by the way (Omaha being home to some large insurance companies). If anything he drove the bill further right from the original Heritage Foundation version. “This just in. We have news, and I wish to stress that this is unconfirmed. But we have news that in negotiations on a key bill, a leading Senator used his leverage to get pork for his constituents. Again, this is unconfirmed, but if it’s true, this will be the first time this has happened in the history of the Republic.” ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448/38 "2013-08-29T23:25:44Z")
Is compromise necessarily the democratic or best way forward though? Currently the UK has a coalition and many were delighted with this as a means of watering down some of the less savoury policies of the parties through compromise. The Lib Dems and the Tories have decided that compromise means parcelling off departments between them based on their passion and letting each party have a lot of leeway in their areas of concern. So Tory policies on health and education, which are just horrifying, are permitted in exchanged for the Lib Dems having licence to play fast and loose with constitutional ‘reform’. I appreciate that America’s system is very different and may not play out that way, but I’d be cautious! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-america-had-a-multiparty-system-wouldnt-moderates-rule/667448.md?page=1)