That's my belief. Separate out the Democrats into the centrists and the socialists. Separate the Republicans into the capitalists and the racists. Add the libertarians and the Greens. Then you'd be able to vote how you actually felt, and feel that if you'd compromised you'd at least done so on your own terms.
I'm not so sure people would feel that way. We've already got a multi-stage process, where people vote in primaries, and then in a general election. It's not a full ranked-choice voting scheme, but it's also not just a one-step winner-take-all process.
Nonetheless, a lot of people seem very dissatisfied when they lose the primary. I don't know if they'd feel any better if they lost it in a ranked-choice voting scheme instead.
The successful party is the one that enforces conformity rather than encouraging diversity. Hammering out that compromise is hard, because it means forging coalitions and making people swallow things they've objected to in the past. But that seems to be more effective than pointing to a set of voting rules and saying "You agreed to these, so go out and live with having lost."
