Unfortunately, many countries have First-Past-The-Post voting systems, so voting for a third party is often, mathematically, basically the same as voting for the competition.
It's called "The Spoiler Effect", if you want to look it up, and it's why we have many of the two party problems we have today in modern democracy. Ranked Choice/Single Transferrable Vote are much better systems.
Well, many democracies do not vote for their president directly – parliament elects one. They are usually from the strongest party, although if enough smaller parties can get a majority, they can elect the president.
No, it isn't always. In Germany for example, you have two votes per state and federal election. One vote goes to a candidate in your district (fptp, yes) but the other vote is just for a party. The parties put up lists of candidates and parliament gets filled proportionally to the votes they got nationally or statewide.
Now all these smaller parties could form a coalition to get the majority or just use their extensive array of minority opposition powers that the law grants them.
I don't think it's a moderate, left, or right problem. More a "the current power structure will never support it" because it works for those in power now to their advantage.
That just sounds like an attempt to deflect blame away from moderate voters. They undermine, sabotage and attack every effort by progressives and leftists. Then they turn around and expect us to show up in the general election after fucking us over for four years.
"Well he-" so would anything of your progressive agenda do better under Trump?
"We need a revolu-" yeah, it's happening. The USA is slowly becoming an xenophobic anarcho-capitalist religious theocracy for the old & rich. Accelerates greatly when Trump holds power.
"I just won't vote either!!!"
Ok. Go ahead. Just don't complain later when Israel has a $150 billion dollar defense bill coming its way versus 15 billion. You likely will regardless though.