Wasn't trying to be unbiased there and it's not especially relevant to the broader point—I just find the "I want to be free to keep punching myself in the face!" POV funny and couldn't resist a poke. As for evaluating statements, I evaluate everything with bias, of course. FWIW I'm pretty much single-issue on fixing our healthcare system until that's done, and only one viable party's even sort-of trying to do that. Anyway, the post that started this thread was written by one "mises" so I'm not worried about ruffling feathers—that was inevitable.
At any rate, the two-party thing's how our (the US's) system's structured. It stabilizes there. A third party replacing one of the big two, as has happened occasionally in the past, would assuredly acquire a good bit of distasteful cruft along the way. Effective political action revolves around trying to help a 3rd party replace one of them despite that likely outcome (and accepting an even smaller voice in policy than most voters have, in the meantime); participation in one of the big two parties themselves (much, much large effect than just voting in elections, though still usually tiny); or working to reform our system to break the two-party stability point. Or some combination of those things.
At any rate, the two-party thing's how our (the US's) system's structured. It stabilizes there. A third party replacing one of the big two, as has happened occasionally in the past, would assuredly acquire a good bit of distasteful cruft along the way. Effective political action revolves around trying to help a 3rd party replace one of them despite that likely outcome (and accepting an even smaller voice in policy than most voters have, in the meantime); participation in one of the big two parties themselves (much, much large effect than just voting in elections, though still usually tiny); or working to reform our system to break the two-party stability point. Or some combination of those things.