• alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      not really, no. in an american context, it means this:

      In short, fusion – also known as cross-ballot endorsements – gives the smaller party more brand recognition along with its own ballot line. Minor parties often have difficulties fielding a candidate in every race, so fusion also allows that minor party to try to use its ballot line to influence even those races in which it has not been able to recruit its own candidate by dangling its endorsement in front of a major party candidate (though that feature has led to some partisan shenanigans and horse trading – more on that below). If the race is close, the minor party endorsement might play the role of kingmaker.

      a few states make use of it, most prominently New York where there are existing third-parties for progressives (WFP), Greens (the Greens), and dissenting conservatives (Conservative) and so they can make a difference in the outcome of a result. there are some upsides to this—and no shortage of downsides, which the substack post here covers.

      • Bob@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Ah, thanks for the short version, I couldn’t see the full article.

        I see no reason we can’t have multiple party endorsements on the ballot.