In other countries, you essentially vote for a political party when you vote in an election — not a specific candidate. When you vote for a party, you vote for a list of candidates that party has put forward, where the parties have ranked people in the order they prefer. Let’s take the United Kingdom as a working example (we’ll only work with the three biggest parties represented in Parliament for simplicity’s sake). You could vote for the Labour Party’s list of candidates, the Conservative Party’s list of candidates, or the Liberal Democrat’s list of candidates. Say when the election results come in, the Conservative Party won 60% of the vote, the Labour Party won 30% of the vote, and the Liberal Democratic Party won 10% of the vote. If there are one hundred seats in Parliament, the Conservative Party won 60, the Labour Party won 30, and the Liberal Democratic Party won 10.

If there were 75 people on the Conservative Party’s candidate list, the first 60 listed will hold seats in Parliament. For the Labour Party, the first 30 candidates on their list would hold seats. For the Liberal Democrats, the first 10 candidates on their list would win seats. Because the Conservative Party won a simple majority of the seats, they would control the government. Out of the 60 members voted into parliament, a cabinet would be chosen. Essentially, those 60 members vote who will become the next prime minister from their own ranks. It’s usually clear before the election who a particular party would chose for prime minister should they win a majority. Although citizens voted for a party, they theoretically could be voting for who they want to be prime minister, knowing that should that party win a majority, that member of parliament would then be prime minister.

If a political party doesn’t win a majority of the votes but wins a plurality, they’re likely to form a coalition government with their closest ally/allies. In doing so, they should be able to control over 50% of the seats. However, rather than having complete control over who goes into what position in the cabinet, the cabinet will be made up of a hodgepodge of members of different poliltical parties. The biggest party in the coalition will likely get the prime ministership, but the various cabinet positions are usually brokered to the coalition parties in an effort to get them to join the coalition in the first place.

Because parliamentary systems are based so heavily on political parties, individual members almost ALWAYS vote in line with their party. You often see party cohesion rates of 99-100% in parliamentary governments. If they don’t vote in line, the party has the option of not placing them on the candidate list in the next election. So to keep their jobs, members vote the way the party tells me.

In the United States, political parties simply don’t have that same kind of power. Anyone can choose to run as a Democrat or a Republican, and the parties don’t really have a say in it. Sure, they can choose not to endorse a candidate. However, they’re unlikely to not endorse someone running under their banner because they need the seats for organizational purposes once they get into government. So, a candidate can say he’s a Republican but hold very liberal positions or a Democratic candidate can hold very conservative positions. While party cohesion in the United States is still high (85-90%), it’s NOTHING compared to parliamentary standards. Once people get into government, party plays a bigger influence when it comes to putting people onto committees, etc. However, political parties recognize people got to Congress because of what their constituencies want and will allow their members much more leeway understanding members might have to deviate from party lines in order to keep their jobs in the next election. Basically, American elections are much more candidate-centered.

In addition, voting for House and Senate doesn’t mean you’re voting for president. Parliamentary elections, by design, are elections for both the representative and executive branch. In the United States, you vote for the president in a different election. That’s why you often get branches of different political parties: the presidency held by a Republican by a Democratic Congress.

Finally, parliamentary governments are much more legislatively efficient than the American government. Because of the party unity, you get legislation pushed through parliament and put into effect very quickly. In the United States, the system of checks and balances purposefully slows down the system. People often complain of the slowness of American government, but that slowness is intentional.

Let me know if I can clear anything el