Describe the effects of winner-take-all elections
Compare plurality and proportional representation
Winner-takes-all Elections, Plurality Voting, and Proportional Representation
The winner-takes-all elections entail a single-winner voting system often used to elect members of the legislature and executive officers. This is the most common system in the world applied in the US, United Kingdom (UK), and Canada. In this voting system, the candidate with the most votes either through a simple or absolute majority of votes regarding the laws in place is the winner while those who lose regardless of the margin do not get a chance to represent their voters (Murphy, 2020). This paper will discuss the effects of the winner-takes-all elections and compare the plurality and proportional representation.
At first, the winner-takes-all elections lead to a two-party system by discouraging third parties. For instance, this system has favored only two parties in the US because through the country’s history, there have only been two major parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party (The Two-Party System). Over the decades, numerous third parties have come and gone out of American politics. According to Tollar and Kimball (2020), most of these parties such as the Prohibition Party, the Populists, the Greenbackers, and the Reform Party are formed to promote a particular cause or individual leader. As evident in the US, it very unlikely for third parties that are unable to attract many supporters to beat a more popular party in an election with long-term supporters (The Two-Party System). Thus in the winner-take-all elections, these third parties will receive no reward at all because often they finish lower than second place. When they fail in an election and get no rewards or representation at all their supporters do not believe in these parties again making them eventually disappear …………for help with this assignment contact us via Email Address: firstname.lastname@example.org