Again, The Orange Baboon

[Thumpalumpacus]

In addition to the practicality angle, Thumper my friend, I also worry that people get their hopes up too much about the power of having more than two parties.  I don't really see how that is going to make much difference when you don't properly educate the masses.  If you look at how the Brits do it, it seems the only difference is that the parties have to negotiate among themselves in order to put together a ruling coalition.  The part I like about their system is that once they achieve that ruling coalition they aren't hamstrung by the separation of powers.  Here everyone whines and points to a different branch of power to explain why they were unable to achieve their goals.  In England, if you're in power (and genuinely have the support of your coalition) it is on you to do as you see best.  The results can then be judged for how well they worked or didn't.

I don't think of a competitive third party as a panacaea, but it'd help. Even more important, to my mind, is proportional representation, and the elimination of the electoral college -- but those changes won't happen without outsider thinking.

I like that powers are separated here. The thought of having no course of redress for bad government decisions scares me. Voting every four years is simply not enough check on the power-hungry if they already have the reins of government in their hands.

More directly to your point, it's incumbent upon the third-parties to educate the electorate. I think the two major alternatives have both failed in that regard.