• FlowVoid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    And if the leader of the second biggest party would rather work with the third biggest party?

    Then the biggest party could well remain out of government, because someone decided that a different coalition would form the government.

    The virtue of a two party popular vote is that once the votes are counted there is a clear winner determined by the voters, and nobody can change the winner behind the scenes.

    • friendlymessage
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      As long as the coalition represents the majority, I don’t see why the largest party needs to be part of the government. The largest party doesn’t represent the will of the people by itself, otherwise they would have a majority.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yes, that ends up happening sometimes, but the winner will at least be allowed to try.

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Coalition building happens in a two party system, too. The difference is that it happens before the election, not after. That way the voters, not the coalition builders, get the final say.

        • friendlymessage
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          In a two party system the power balance within the coalition is decided behind closed doors and the voters have no say in it