Some advantages for having a divided party system is it provide a stable balance by accommodating varied interest and opinions, Power sharing creates incentives to compromise. With both parties responsible for governing, they each have a stake in getting things done, and Because legislation needs support from both parties to pass, policy is pushed to the center where pragmatic solutions to problems are found. Since the government consists of different organized groups and individual voter, it’s necessary to consider those people thoughts. …show more content…
What I mean by this is when liberal legislative branch do not get enough votes to bypass a veto by conservative executive branch, it is vetoed by the president. The same the can happen if the president tries to get a bill into the house too. I can also argue that having a divided government is polarized population. Either you are a hippy or you’re a redneck; peace or war; social program or fiscal conversation, etc. we have to deicide either we are one or the other, we cannot be both. For example, let’s say that I want to have a libertarian in my office for my district in the house. I could vote for one, but conservative would vote for republican. So the questions that arise next is, is a divided party government more effective than a government with one