Electing a President? The TWO Party System.... Why not three or four?

It almost always seems to be a TWO way contest.... Isn't it interesting?

This appears to be the case in every democracy I can think of off-hand, which the news reports about....

It turns out to be the same for PRODUCTS too, in any well-defined sufficiently precise category.... in mature industries at least....

TWO leaders carve up most of the pie between themselves, and while further differentiation can then change that.... It seems to be widespread....

For example, COKE and.... PEPSI....

GENERAL MOTORS and.... FORD (until the Japanese car manufacturers came along and took some big slices for themselves)....

MICROSOFT and.... APPLE....

This shake-up is happening online now too....

AMAZON.COM and.... BN.COM

(Few mention borders.com, for instance....)

An almost universal trend as industries mature....

It's tough for a number 3 to get a look in, if they are seen to be competing for the same sufficiently precise slot....

And for number 4, even tougher....

It's like our brain has only room for 2 places for any well-defined category, and unless it is sufficiently differentiated (eg. sports cars vs. economical cars), our mind doesn't want to go beyond 2....

Any thoughts on this?

- Dien

If you are not a student of American History, the answer is probably, "No".

The Constitution is written so the two highest vote getters within the Electorical College become President and Vice President respectively.

But, back in 1799 Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr deadlocked with the same number of electorical college votes.

The election was thrown to the House of Representatives where Thomas Jefferson came out on top and Aaron Burr became VP.

Congress immediately passed a LAW, not an amendment to the Constitution, that, henceforth, all President and Vice Presidental candidates would come from the same party.

And, yes, this Aaron Burr is the same one that killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel while still VP.