Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The United States needs a tripartisanship political movement

Checklist for "Democrat," "Republican" and "Independent"
Getty Images

Anderson edited "Leveraging: A Political, Economic and Societal Framework," has taught at five universities and ran for the Democratic nomination for a Maryland congressional seat in 2016.

Whoever wins the presidential election in 2024 — Donald Trump, Joe Biden, or some other Republican or Democrat if one of them drops out — we need a political movement to launch within two to four years to represent the interests of the 40-plus percent of Americans who do not identify with either of the major political parties. If Trump wins, democracy will not close down in America although it may experience a series of hard body punches for four years. If Biden wins, lukewarm support for him and the Democrats does not mean we do not need a major democratic revolution.

Social movements and political movements, according to political scientists and sociologists, engage a group or groups of people in some advocacy effort to promote a collective goal. That goal could be broadly progressive or broadly conservative, although the majority of social and political movements have been on the progressive side. The goal could be very radical, whether left wing (socialist) or right wing (fascist). Some of the most familiar social movements in the United States are the labor movement, the anti-Vietnam-War movement, the civil rights movement, the women's movement, the LGBTQ movement, the Tea Party movement, the pro-life movement, and the environmental movement.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter


The United States needs an independents movement, which should be intertwined with a tripartisanship movement that would include some Democrats and Republicans. We must transition away from bipartisanship: Washington is too polarized to achieve it. The two-party system is failing because over 40 percent of the public has no party or group of independents who speak for them. Bipartisanship is not the goal in the United Kingdom, France or Australia, and it should gradually be replaced in the United States with the goal of tripartisanship.

Tripartisanship will come about when a sufficient number of independents are either elected to Congress or switch from one of the major parties while in office already. Getting to a critical mass of five to six independents in the Senate and 10-15 independents in the House — who can come from different ideological points of views — could take eight to 10 years. It makes more sense for independents to fight for individual seats than to start anything resembling a national movement. Once some successes have been achieved, however, it will be wise to officially name and start a political movement. The movement, like the runner in a relay race, needs to have the baton handed to her once she has started running herself.

Social and political movements differ in many ways. Some are focused on one issue, like the pro-life movement or the anti-Vietnam movement, while others are focused on a range of issues, policies and regulations that concern a general issue. The civil rights movement, the women's movement and the environmental movement fall into this category. The tripartisanship movement does not concern one policy. Indeed, it concerns a range of policies and concepts, including ranked-choice voting and independent redistricting commissions to end gerrymandering.

A critical question is when to start such a movement, or what to name it if in fact it has already started. The civil rights movement, for example, was getting started with the Supreme Court’s Brown vs. Board of Education decision even though no one said it at the time. With the Montgomery bus boycott, which lasted a year, the concept of a social movement was becoming more evident to the press and to the public.

A tripartisanship movement is consistent with other political movements that also call for major political change. This includes umbrella movements that are trying to unite an extensive array of political organizations in the “save our democracy” space like the Bridge Alliance, which coordinates the activities of 80 organizations (and publishes The Fulcrum). Bringing about major social and political change is a different enterprise from building a stadium. There are different organizations and movements operating simultaneously with overlapping agendas.

A tripartisanship movement is narrower in scope than efforts that seek to unite organizations that are addressing problems ranging from civic education to campaign finance reform to making it easier to vote. As a result, it is ideally suited to take the lead on working on one major problem and providing fuel for movements and organizations that are addressing a wider set of problems. The tripartisanship movement could take 10 years to achieve its main objectives. Its forward motion will simultaneously help advance the efforts of organizations like the Bridge Alliance.

Read More

a group of people arranged in the shape of the United states of America map

A group of people arranged in the shape of the United states of America map.

Getty Images, attjeacock

Where Is the “Real America”?

Is there such a thing as a “real America”? A battle now rages over this simple question. Some Democratic party operatives claim the real America are so-called “Trump voters,” who they say they need to better “study” in order to win future elections. Many Republican voices argue the real America are just those who support the new administration 100% of the time. Still, others assert that different demographics or geography comprise the real America. It’s as if the real America is one particular slice or another of our nation.

These caricatures lead us sorely astray. But there is a real America. I work in it every day.

Keep ReadingShow less
‘When People Spend Time Together, They Are Less Inclined To See Each Other As the Enemy’: ​A Conversation With Matt Grossmann

Picture of Matt Grossmann

‘When People Spend Time Together, They Are Less Inclined To See Each Other As the Enemy’: ​A Conversation With Matt Grossmann

In The Sun Also Rises, Ernest Hemingway famously observed that a character went broke in two ways: gradually, then suddenly. The same dynamic has been at work in American politics. For decades, the composition of our principal political parties has been slowly shifting, without a great deal of public attention. And then the 2024 presidential election happened, and it was suddenly obvious: the Democrats, traditionally the party of the working class, had become the party of educated elites.

Matt Grossmann has been a keen observer of this transition. A professor of political science at Michigan State University, Grossmann also directs the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research and hosts the “Science of Politics” podcast for the Niskanen Center. With his co-author David A. Hopkins, Grossmann recently published Polarized by Degrees: How the Diploma Divide and the Culture War Transformed American Politics, a book that documents a remarkable shift in American society. Since 1960, we have seen a massive expansion in the number of adult Americans earning college degrees—from roughly 7 percent of the population to nearly 40 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Drain—More Than Fight—Authoritarianism and Censorship
Getty Images, Mykyta Ivanov

Drain—More Than Fight—Authoritarianism and Censorship

The current approaches to proactively counteracting authoritarianism and censorship fall into two main categories, which we call “fighting” and “Constitution-defending.” While Constitution-defending in particular has some value, this article advocates for a third major method: draining interest in authoritarianism and censorship.

“Draining” refers to sapping interest in these extreme possibilities of authoritarianism and censorship. In practical terms, it comes from reducing an overblown sense of threat of fellow Americans across the political spectrum. When there is less to fear about each other, there is less desire for authoritarianism or censorship.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Moral Awakening of Cory Booker's Marathon Speech
Cory Booker | U.S. Senator Cory Booker speaking with attende… | Flickr
www.flickr.com

The Moral Awakening of Cory Booker's Marathon Speech

Just when prophetic witness felt muted by political expediency, Senator Cory Booker's unprecedented 25-hour marathon speech on the Senate floor is a powerful testament to moral courage and democratic resilience. Beginning at 7 p.m. on Monday (3/31/25) and extending through Tuesday (4/1/25) evening, Booker's historic address surpassed Strom Thurmond's infamous 1957 record, though with a profound difference, reconstituting the meaning of a "moral moment."

The New Jersey senator's sustained oratory wasn't merely a political gesture—it embodied the prophetic tradition that has long animated America's moral progress. Like the Hebrew prophets who stood before kings, speaking truth to power at high personal cost, Booker's political discourse represented a contemporary form of bearing witness. His physical endurance became a metaphor for the sustained resistance required in facing injustice.

Keep ReadingShow less