CMV: The only way for the "Two-party system" (aka First Past the Post) to be abolished is for Americans to agree to stop
Americans often complain about how we have a "two-party" system.
62% of Americans say the two major parties are doing a "poor job" and that a third party is needed. \[[1](https://news.gallup.com/poll/696521/americans-need-third-party-offer-soft-support.aspx)\]
However, 65% of Americans voted in the 2024 election, and 98.5% voted Democrat or Republican. \[[2](https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025/2024-presidential-election-voting-registration-tables.html)\]
You see the problem. What we say and how we behave are in major disalignment.
I say, if we truly want to end the two-party system, we simply need to organize a national campaign to stop voting en masse and force the system to change. Put our money where our mouth is.
What people actually mean when they say we have a "two-party" system is that we have a First-Past-the-Post voting system.
One of the most important political videos I've ever watched is [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo) by CGP Grey explaining why we have a "two party" system (which is actually a First Past the Post system). If you haven't seen it, I cannot recommend it strongly enough.
One of the major points explored in the vide
Americans continue to express a desire for a third party but have reservations about voting for third-party candidates.
news.gallup.com
From where I sit, this reads stronger on paper than in practice Feels like an opening move, not an ending.
To be fair, this feels like a half-step, not a full move This probably isn’t the last word on it. That’s the impression it gives me.
To be fair, this feels rushed rather than thought through which makes the reaction pretty predictable Others will probably see it differently.
Honestly, this solves one problem while creating another and that’s where the disagreement starts That’s the key detail here. We’ll see how people react over time.
To be fair, this depends heavily on what happens next and that’s where people will push back We’ll see how people react over time.
If you zoom out, the logic is there, but the execution is uneven At least from my perspective.
Reaction: very shocking
there’s a lot said here but not much clarified That’s what makes this interesting. This could age very differently in a week. Others will probably see it differently.
If we’re being honest, the follow-through is what will decide this That’s the key detail here. Let’s see what happens next.
Honestly, the framing does a lot of heavy lifting here and that friction is hard to ignore That’s what changes the context. Interested to see the follow-up.
Reaction: Remember The Darkness games and Prey 2006..Yeah I do.
If you zoom out, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified and that’s where the disagreement starts Others will probably see it differently.
From where I sit, the main issue seems to be how this is handled Not convinced this is settled yet.
If you zoom out, the intention might be solid, the rollout less so Not convinced this is settled yet.
I get the idea, this comes across more reactive than planned and that’s the part people are stuck on This probably isn’t the last word on it.
Putting bias aside, this feels more about execution than intent which is why this is getting picked apart Time will tell. That’s just my read on it.
this feels more about execution than intent That’s the key detail here. Hard to say where this lands long term.
Reaction: me_irl
On the surface, the wording alone shifts how people read this This probably isn’t the last word on it.
Honestly, this feels like a half-step, not a full move
Putting bias aside, the main issue seems to be how this is handled That’s the key detail here. This could age very differently in a week. At least from my perspective.
this feels more about execution than intent and that’s where it gets complicated That’s just how it reads to me.
From a practical angle, the wording alone shifts how people read this and that tension shows up immediately Not convinced this is settled yet. That’s the impression it gives me.
Honestly, this solves one problem while creating another and that friction is hard to ignore
Real talk, this feels rushed rather than thought through That’s just how it reads to me. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
From a neutral view, the signal is clear, the strategy less so Feels like there’s more coming here. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Reaction: me_irl
From a practical angle, the signal is clear, the strategy less so
Trying to be fair, the signal is clear, the strategy less so and that’s where it gets complicated Hard to say where this lands long term. That’s the impression it gives me.
On the surface, this reads stronger on paper than in practice and that’s why opinions are all over the place This could age very differently in a week. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Reaction: me_irl
Just reading this, the main issue seems to be how this is handled Feels like an opening move, not an ending. That’s the impression it gives me.
From where I sit, the framing does a lot of heavy lifting here and that’s where people will push back We’ll see how people react over time. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
the way this is presented changes how it lands which is why this is getting picked apart That’s just how it reads to me. That’s just my read on it.