zlacker

Australia has both preferential and mandatory voting, and the end result isn't much better.

It's still a two-party system, but then there are also single-issue or hardline minor parties who often have the ability to hold the government hostage on their demands.

>>tooman+(OP)
The Australian senate which use proportional representation rather than two-party preferred preferential has a more reasonable spread imho.

>>tooman+(OP)
I'm Australian. It's definitely not perfect, but our politics has managed to stay moderate in a way the US has not.

I shudder to think what we'd look like if disenfranchising voters were a more viable strategy.

>>tooman+(OP)
Yes, it's a two-party system, but because voting is mandatory, it means that the overwhelming majority of people (who are largely centrist with differing flavours), electorally punish politicians that stray too far from the political centre. At the same time, the "loony fringes" have much less relative voting power compared to the overwhelming majority. Remember, in voluntary voting regimes, its the loonies that are most invested in getting out the vote, whereas a majority of reasonably centrist people are more likely to think, "Why bother? My vote won't change anything". If any Australian politician or party promotes voluntary voting BEWARE!