The situation is not helped by the inherently unstable nature of your government. The writers of the Constitution didn't want a King, but couldn't get rid of the notion of a Head of State with executive powers. So they changed 'King' to 'President' and made the role elected rather than hereditary.

As a reult, your system remains similar to that of Britain in the 16th, 17th and 18th Centuries, where the will of an elected legislature can be frustrated by the decrees of a single ruler.

Over here, we simply stripped the executive power from the monarch, creating a symbolic and ceremonial Hesd of State, and placed it within the legislature. Sir Keir Starmer, as Prime Minister, is 'first among equals' and must obtain and keep the support of his Cabinet (also all members of the legislature) and back-benchers in order to govern and legislate. He must face, and answer to, the opposition in Parliament every week.

There is also the fact that ALL decisions in Parliament require only a simple majority - no two-thirds or three-quarters required.

Finally, a two-party system is unsustainable. You need at least one more party to keep the other two honest.

In our system, no single person - no matter how fanatical or numerous their supporters - could bend our democracy out of shape. Liz (the Lettuce) Truss tried, and got the boot in short order!