I have heard this sentiment from so many people in both parties.
As the Repubs are pulled to the right by their fringe and the Dems are pulled to the left; the time is right for a new centrist party to emerge.
A fiscally conservative, socially progressive party.
A party that promotes self reliance but recognizes that we all need help from time to time. A party that is both Democratic and Republican at the same time. Progressive and conservative.
As long as this new party wins a few lower offices first and earns a reputation in its own right instead of aiming for the top with nothing more substantive than “Vote for us because we aren’t them!!”, I’m all for it.
I think an argument can be made that the US already has an underground centrist party.
There are several govs of both parties running their states with centrist ideals. Certainly, both Biden and Romney can be seen as centrist candidates.
Centrists often have a hard time winning because they have to pick sides. Thereby alienating a sizable chunk of voters who would’ve voted for them if they had a different initial after their names.
Biden stands a good chance of winning not because he’s a Dem. But because he’s not odious to Repubs who are having a hard time voting for our President, like the op.
It’s time to just make it official.
And if Democrats are more prone to join this new party than Republicans, then you’ve just handed the country to the Republicans on a silver platter.
Great plan. 
Why would it be more likely for Dems to join?
And if it was the other way round would that be better?
It’s ok to alienate 49% of the country as long as your party is the 51 is how we’ve gotten into this horrible mess in the first place.
You have to really love the Donald to still support him or the GOP at this point after how much they keep messing the country up and will continue to do so if unchecked on November 3rd!
Have you researched how your Congressman voted on Trump issues? Because right now, I (a moderate) can no longer vote for my prior choices, because they are aiding and abetting the criminal-in-chief. Not because I don’t think he’s a qualified candidate, but because it sends a message that needs to be said. I can bear a bit of incompetence (sadly), but I can’t bear with a politician who puts party over country and due diligence.
^^Yup.
What’s in a name?
If the Republicans become less extremist and more socially progressive, then it doesn’t matter what the team is called.
It’s okay to alienate 70% of the country as long as you can disenfranchise or gerrymander them is how the Republicans made this mess in the first place.
I’ve been watching some of these testimonials of ‘Republicans Against Trump’ on YouTube and some go on for some time of how they are unhappy with Trump and how he is damaging the country and worse. And some end with ‘I can’t vote for him, and I’m not sure what I am doing to do on November 3rd’. What. the. Fuck.
Some of these are encouraging, but recent news makes me feel if he isn’t defeated at an historical level, he will get tons of support to steal the election, and there will literally be blood in the streets. Didn’t a state say something about ignoring a Biden win and place their electoral votes with Trump?
Who is even mounting a third-party bid this year?
I think it would be great if we had a three party system of roughly equal size, and a Centrist Party makes the most sense to me. Any more than three and you are asking for trouble in my opinion. But there are two big problems with the idea and hopefully they can be overcome (although recent events are ruining my faith in humankind).
But first, why a Centrist Party makes sense to me. When both John McCain and Mitt Romney were selected I was very pleased because they both seemed like the reasonable, serious minded adult who would solve problems and actually move us forward. But the first thing the Republican strategists did was drive them to the right and pander to the base. It seems to be part of their DNA with that crowd. You eventually had Romney denouncing the healthcare plan he authored and McCain was an even worse puppet of the establishment.
(Complete sidebar – We will never know how good of a president Barack Obama could have been because McConnell and his band of assassins devoted their entire energy into opposing everything he tried to accomplish. This is why I disrespect McConnell more than Trump – Trump is a symptom, McConnell is the cancer.)
Back to the topic, a three legged stool can easily be balanced on any two legs – but is almost impossible to balance upon one for very long. That would make it very easy to fix problems like Trump after one term. But it would also mean a good candidate can be removed before he hits his stride if he or she is slow to realize gains in a first term - but that is a lesser concern. It will almost always force some form of cooperation, a temporary alliance where partisanship is not enough to support a weak candidate. Also pandering to two bases is very unlikely to be successful. Pure economic efficiency should in most cases be enough to select a best possible instead of a best ‘our party’ can muster.
Upon reflection, it might lead to almost every single president serving a single term as that candidate really only has a one third chance of reelection unless he or she really over performs. I do not know enough about probabilities (and about voter dynamics) to know if this is true or not.
But here are my two objections that must be addressed. First, are we going to sanction an administration that wins with 34% while those two loser parties only garner a measly 33%? Are we going to go to the trouble and expense of a runoff election if say no candidate wins at least 42% of the vote AND beats the closest opponent by (some percentage?? 2%, 5%, whatever)?
Second, how do we get there? Teddy Roosevelt couldn’t start a third party and his face is on Mt. Rushmore! Neither party is going to want to give voters off of their roles nor are there enough unregistered voters to make a third party. It has to be formed out of volition – people who want to belong to a real party that is moderate and centrist. But until it is well established it will be hard to attract and keep members. Personally, I would love to belong to a middle of the road party but I don’t see it as being more than a fringe group (ironic for a centrist party, huh?) for a very long time. Maybe after this election cycle IS the perfect time to launch such an endeavor; if you get it up and running you may count upon my membership and support.
Third and final point, how would it work in congress? Especially in the Senate I see a potential mess. It might fix things like important matters never getting a floor vote, but it also might mean everything boils down to obstructionism if no one has a majority. The chance for corruption and backroom dealing seems like it might become rampant.
Okay, actual final point. As long as I am hijacking my own thread I have an idea that I believe could hold real merit. This idea predates Trump by a decade or more. Near the end of every presidential term, with only standard news coverage and no campaigning there is a confidence/no confidence vote. If the president wins – he or she gets a two year term extension. If he or she does not get a majority, he or she is not eligible to run for four more years and a full election is held with entirely new candidates. The two year term extensions are limited to three unless the president has replaced a sitting president during an existing term in which case it would be two possible term extensions. So still ten years max give or take and someone doing a good job does not have to stop governing to run a campaign, just be competent enough to earn the next extension. Or not be competent enough and go home without using the incumbency as a tool to be reelected.
Please name this iconoclast & cite an occasion or two when he “went against Trump’s wishes.”
Don’t know why you feel that is important, as I’m guessing he’s not your Congressman, but here you go:
These days a lot of people also think that Fascism & especially Nazism are the same as Socialism / Communism. They see “National Socialism” and they stop thinking.
Thanks for the fascinating chart.
I just assumed that most Republicans automatically toed the line. I wasn’t wrong. According to that chart only 6 Republican Senators and 10 Republican Representatives voted with Trump less than 80% of the time.
That’s politics these days.
^^^Yeah–that chart is interesting.
You’re right about politics and folks usually voting the party line.
It’s all well and good that some Republicans vote against Trump and McConnell, but it would be far more effective and meaningful if these independent, maverick Republicans would have the balls to punish the party by leaving it altogether. By staying, by using the fundraising and political machinery, they are enabling the party when it gives in to its worst impulses. If we end up having a disastrous election outcome, make no mistake: those who still put the R by their names will be just as responsible as Kevin McCarthy, Mitch McConnell, and Rush Limbaugh.
A three party system is wholly unworkable under the current constitution. Every election would end up in the House with each state having one vote.
Just adopt the single transferable vote.
Or some other ranked voting ranked voting system