Many people talk about the need for a third party in the US. It is pretty clear to me that we effectively have a three party segmentation already.

 

The Republican party is now a split party. You have the traditional conservative Republicans and you have the Tea Party type Republicans. The numbers in the GOP look like they are about 60-65% hard line partisans who would rather block any action by government than concede anything. The remaining 35-40% are conservatives who are more mainstream socially but still very conservative fiscally.

 

This split has caused problems for the Republicans in national races. To win the presidential nomination, in the primaries you have to court the far right and shape policies that satisfy them. Then when you get to the national race where independents and more mainstream Republicans and Democrats decide races, those moderate voters cannot pull the trigger on the right leaning candidate.

 

What is the answer for Republicans? Is it Trump who is adept at winning appeal to both sides and even frustrated Democrats with his tough talk?

 

But what happens after the fall election? Congress is already in stalemate mode. Paul Ryan is losing votes and influence because of the obstructionist Tea Party faction. How do the Republicans solve that problem? Is a three party fragmented government really the solution this nation needs?

To an extent what you’ve identified has always been true. Both parties in our two-party system are large coalitions of often disparate groups. The nature of the two-party system demands this “large tent” party system. As an example, if the environment is your central interest you can either vote for the Green Party, who you 100% agree with, or vote for the Democratic Party, who you might only agree with 50% with but they can win.

 

What’s unique about this election cycle is the question of whether certain cleavages within the Republican Party are intractable. Donald Trump’s candidacy has been unprecedented. It’s very likely the Republicans will have a “brokered” convention, which is also unprecedented in the modern era since both parties have switched to a primary election system. Something is going on within the Republican Party.

 

I’ll loosely describe the cleavage within the Republican Party as that between the traditional conservative oriented party and a populist faction. This populist faction is largely the Tea Party (I suspect) and they’ve found themselves increasingly alienated within the party. McConnell and the rest of the leadership have promised that they’ll stop Obama and roll back his policies, only to talk tough and strike a deal (debt ceiling, government shutdown, budget deal, etc.). Both parties function by doing this – you can’t always get everything you want, so you get the best you can and move on. For whatever reason, this has driven animosity with Republican voters (perhaps this is connected to the decline of the white working class).

 

Now, I’m going to get into some grey areas and make a very foolish prediction. The big question is whether this divide is a one-time deal or is permanent. Put differently, will this be a re-aligning election? Let’s say Trump gets routed in November, will the Republicans come back together and unite around a more traditional, policy-oriented leadership and candidates where certain concessions to demographic realities have to be made? Will they indulge Trumpism and run more extreme outsiders? Will both sides split off from each other?

 

My bad (but fun) prediction is that a split occurs over the next 10 years, starting with this election. The Republican leadership wrestles control of the party away from Trump and Trump supporters land elsewhere (or, possibly, vice versa with the old leadership moving to a totally new party and Trumpism dominating the existing Republican Party). At the same time, a divide exists within the Democratic Party as well. The younger generation seems to be completely behind Sanders’ message and sprouts of more radical politics are evident with the various protest movements. This divides the Democrats between a more extreme and a more traditional path (read liberal writer Jonathan Chait for a representation of this).

 

So, imagining the Republicans splitting up and these divides within the Democratic Party existing, I can imagine a new party formation. A populist, Tea Party like party emerges out of the Trump supporters, but it dies off after an election or two. A new center-right party emerges that moderates some from the existing Republican Party. It cuts ties with much of its old guard on social issues (favors gay marriage, willing to legalize marijuana, etc.) and maintains a business-friendly, “pragmatist” economic agenda (probably led by a Paul Ryan figure or the so-called “reformocons”). In a few years, the young Sanders’ supporters come to a majority within the Democratic Party and the older, traditional party members feeling alienated by a more extreme message find a home in the new center-right party. This isn’t unfeasible with still young college-educated liberals – they are largely socially liberal but also more likely to be receptive to a fiscal policy predicated on entitlement reform and lower taxes. In the end, you end up with an extremist right-wing third-party, a new conservative coalition centered around economic pragmatism, and a Scandinavian-style leftist party.

 

Lots of things would have to happen. And most of this is predicated on how the party cleavages relate to generational shifts, where Trump represents an aging white voter, Sanders represents a very young, diverse, collegiate voter, and then various groups of people are caught in between. To an extent this dynamic occurs continually as the country ages (what was progressive/conservative in 1950 isn’t the same as it is today, especially on social issues). The major difference is we are at a breaking point with one of the major political parties during this election and this dynamic could lead to new party alignments, as long as you’re willing to indulge such wild speculation.

 

The alternative is nothing changes and the parties drift furhter apart. I think that would be worse for our democracy (consider this article).

^ He said cleavages. Heh-heh.

I would argue both parties are segmented. There is a large portion of Democrats who truly want socialism and don't think they can go far enough to the left.

 

As the recent pill said 33%of Bernie supporters aren't voting Hillary. This idea that only the GOP is fractured is a myth.

 

The democrat leadership just did a better job of silencing Bernie this whole election series with a lack of debates and large amounts of super delegates.

I would argue both parties are segmented. There is a large portion of Democrats who truly want socialism and don't think they can go far enough to the left.

 

As the recent pill said 33%of Bernie supporters aren't voting Hillary. This idea that only the GOP is fractured is a myth.

 

The democrat leadership just did a better job of silencing Bernie this whole election series with a lack of debates and large amounts of super delegates.

 

Give them Trump or Cruz and the party unites. Give them Kasich versus Hillary and we may have an issue with your 33%.

I would argue both parties are segmented. There is a large portion of Democrats who truly want socialism and don't think they can go far enough to the left.

 

As the recent pill said 33%of Bernie supporters aren't voting Hillary. This idea that only the GOP is fractured is a myth.

 

The democrat leadership just did a better job of silencing Bernie this whole election series with a lack of debates and large amounts of super delegates.

 

I don't think there is the same fragmentation in elected Democrats that you have with elected Republicans. There are serious divisions in the Republican party. It is why Boehner resigned. It is why they had so much trouble electing a new Speaker. And now Paul Ryan can't get consensus in the party to make votes happen. A big part of stagnation in Washington is this division in the R's.

#teammitch