Are More Parties Better Than Two Parties? This exercise relates to the policy debate on two party systems versus multi-party systems. First, you will explore the partisan split in the US between the two-parties and how that split played out in the past presidential elections. Then you will compare the candidates’ views on key issues and explore how a two-party system could affect the candidates for office. Finally, you will explain your preference for two- or multi-party systems. In multiparty systems, political conflict is played out between the various political parties. How do countries with two-party systems resolve these conflicts? 2. Read this article from the Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0714/p01s03-usgn.html What does the article mean when it states that America is split between red and & blue Americas? 3. What does the article mean when it says that the correlation between ideology and party has been growing much stronger in recent years? 4. Go to “http://www.npr.org/index_election2004special.html”>http://www.npr.org/index_election2004special.html and look at the map of the 2004 election results. Name your state and list whether it is a red or blue state. 5. Compare that map to the “Purple America” map of at “http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/”>http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/ In what way does the purple map better illustrate Americans’ divisions? Your text points out that multiparty systems give voters more choices of candidates. Given the relative centrism of both parties’ candidates, how would having a multiparty system affect the positions of candidates for office? Do you think a multiparty system would be better for the US? Why or why not?