I want to throw out some questions and see if we can get a good debate going about some stuff.
1) We've made so much advances in technology, some may argue too much but yet in politics we still have the same old tired 2 party system. Do you guys feel the 2 party system is out of date and should have been advanced in a way by now that we should have had legit 3rd party candidates to vote for?
2) Speaking of our 2 party system, most would say this is the most divided our country has been in years(many blame the last 8 years of Obama on the fact we are so divided at this point) so shouldn't we also just get past candidates being for Republican, Democrat, Right Wing, Liberal, and trying to unify this country as those labels also divide the country down the middle.
I think there is value to the two-party system in that it does, in theory, narrow elections down to two candidates. Parties effectively work when they are "platforms" for a population with a wide array of views as opposed to "tribes." In other words, the GOP traditionally has a wide ideological population of things like moderate libertarians, moral conservatives, Neoconservatives, etc.
From that population, one candidate gets nominated. Same for the Democrats who have a wide ideological base.
Theres always going to be people who are excluded because their preferred candidate lost in the nomination- and that's always been true. It's just been more pronounced recently since both parties have become more fragmented- Bernie and Hillary were extremely different candidates with extremely different platforms, same with Trump and the other GOP primary candidates. Most of the time people will compromise and vote for a candidate that they like more- and that for the most part happened in 2016.
The question is really whether that is good or not: I would argue it is because pluralities get messy. If the candidate that "wins" the election only got 30% of the vote that means that a candidate won who 70% of people voted against. Under the current Electoral system that would also mean that either one party would split and the other would win every election or every election would be decided by the House of Representatives among the top 3 electoral finishers.
The basis of politics is the ability to compromise- and I would argue that the erosion of that idea is more to blame for the divisiveness in the country than any specific person/party. The Federal Government is gridlocked because we voted it into gridlock by voting largely for politicians who are unwilling to compromise with the other side. Its generally bad when we load Congress up with Ted Cruzs and Elizabeth Warrens who view their opposing parties as "stupid" or "bigoted" instead of trying to find a compromise. The fact that people can't see value in each other's arguments is the most disturbing trend in this country.