this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
113 points (99.1% liked)
CanadaPolitics
2174 readers
353 users here now
Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees
Rules
- Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Unless there is another factor such as weak laws against bribery/corruption, how can legislative lurch happen with proportional representation?
The US is both corrupt and not proportional representation.
That's mostly what I said. In the US, a few swing voters in a few swing states decide the President. The President has outsized power within the US. This is even more pronounced now that Trump seems to be pushing a veritable Presidential monarchy.
Aside from the Presidency though, with FPTP you tend towards two parties, with power flipping between them. Consider Canada with the Conservatives and the Liberals. Gun registry, no gun registry as an example.
In PR systems, there can't be the same amount of legislative lurch unless the population at large changes their voting. Even if a less mainstream party is the largest in the parliament/legislature/whatever, unless more than 50% of the population voted for them, there will have to be a coalition government. Even in the "big upset" of the 2023 Netherlands elections, Geert Wilders' Freedom Party only got 37 seats, less than half of what was needed for a majority government. So a coalition was formed and compromises were made. Yes, Netherlands changed tack, but it wasn't as drastic as in a non-PR election, and arguably more accurately reflects the concerns of Dutch citizens overall.