What other Brazilian would be able to fly here on a questionable passport (seeing as he was ordered to surrender it) with no clear plans to ever go back to Brazil?
Perhaps his brother, Eduardo Bolsonaro, who has already been living in the US while facing an arrest warrant in Brazil.
The two-round system is actually very similar in its dynamics to instant runoff voting or FPTP with primaries. All these systems feature a centre squeeze. FPTP without primaries is actually a better system, albeit obviously still vastly inferior to a proportional system, which is what all top-tier democracies (and economies for that matter) use. In the FPTP-without-primary era, the US still had statesmen with broad support as presidents (e.g., FDR, Eisenhower, Theodore Roosevelt), and the election of a Trump would have been unfathomable (at least, on the Republican ticket).
The problem in Israel is not that it has a proportional system, but that Palestinians in the occupied territories have no voting rights. If they did, a two-state solution would have come out of the Knesset a long time ago.
Yes, that can happen, but it’s still not as bad as having a single party of radical nutjobs not having to compromise.
That’s a good suggestion, I advise you to follow it. Take any quality-of-life ranking and look at what kind of political system they have.
In the Social Progress Index, we find the first non-proportional democracy, Ireland, on 8th place. But even Ireland has a semi-proportional system with multi-member districts. The first two-party system is in 13th place, Australia, which uses ranked-choice voting.
In the inequality-adjusted HDI, the first non-proportional is again Ireland in 9th place, with Australia, the UK and Canada from 12th place.
You could also have a look at indices for democracy and rule of law. The V-Dem Democracy has Ireland on 5th place and France (which uses a two-round system) on 9th.