Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Tired of the Two-Party Gridlock? Independents Offer a Way Out

In races from Tennessee to Idaho, independents are rewriting the rules—and aim to reshape Congress

Opinion

Republican, Democratic and independent checkboxes, with the third one checked
Independents will decide the election. What do we know about them?
zimmytws/Getty Images

Something feels wrong. American Democracy is supposed to be the beacon of hope that leads the free world. But for far too many, it feels like our votes do not elect leaders who truly represent what is best for our families and our communities.

Affordability of basic necessities is out of reach, and issues that have over 70% support from the public rarely get a second glance from those who are supposed to represent us. And at this point, our representatives are too busy fighting to maintain power than they are fixing the issues that we as Americans face.


For too long, American democracy has been filtered through two entrenched parties that act more like rival corporations, owned by the same investment bank, than representatives of the people. And we are fed up.

Politicians should actually have to earn your support at the ballot box, instead of assuming your loyalty. The parties want us to believe they are the only choice. But the truth is, more Americans self-identify as independents than with either political party. We are better at democracy because we refuse to play the parties’ game. Instead, we’re changing the rules so that democracy once again works for the people.

Independents aren’t beholden to only considering an idea as red or blue. We don’t have to agree to a strict political ideology or litmus test.

Across the country, independents are stepping forward with fresh ideas, collaborative mindsets, and a commitment to putting people over party. In upcoming elections, candidates like Jon Thorp in Tennessee’s 7th District, Dan Osborn in Nebraska, David Clayton in North Carolina, and Todd Achilles in Idaho are all part of a growing movement that challenges the status quo. These leaders aren’t asking for blind loyalty. Instead, they’re inviting voters to imagine a Congress where no party holds all the cards and every vote matters. When independents win, they can help restore balance, encourage negotiation, and bring merit-based solutions back to the legislative process. The future of American democracy may very well depend on voters willing to break with tradition and embrace representatives who aren't owned by either side.

When you head to the ballot box, consider casting your vote for an independent candidate. Because maybe it’s time we try something different.

I get asked a lot why I’m an Independent. The truth is simple: because Independents are better at democracy.

We don’t need party bosses telling us what to think, how to vote, or who to support. We can look at a person and judge them on their merit. We can look at a bill and judge it on its value. We can decide what matters to us—jobs, schools, healthcare, freedom—without waiting for someone in Washington to hand us a party-approved script. That’s not weakness. That’s democracy the way it was supposed to work.

Meanwhile, the two parties have turned democracy into a game of control. They thrive on division, gridlock, and loyalty tests. They tell us that stepping outside party lines makes us powerless. But the truth is the opposite: stepping outside the parties makes us powerful. It makes us the difference. And that difference could reshape Congress itself.

On December 2, 2025, voters in Tennessee’s 7th District will have a chance to prove it. Jon Thorp isn’t running to serve a party—he’s running to serve people. If he wins, it will be a signal heard across the country: independents can win, and when they do, they can change everything.

Because here’s the part the two parties don’t want you to think about: if independents hold just a handful of seats in 2026, neither party gets an automatic majority. Suddenly, they can’t ignore us. Suddenly, they have to negotiate, compromise, and put ideas ahead of ideology. For once, the balance of power would rest with the people, not the parties.

That’s the fight we’re in. Them versus us. The parties versus the people. And every independent victory brings us closer to a democracy that actually works.

We don’t need permission to take it back. We just need the courage to vote for it.

Austen Campbell is the founder of the Independent National Coalition, Austen has been focused on building infrastructure to support Independent candidates all over the country. He was the former Deputy Finance Director for Dan Osborn's Senate campaign in Nebraska and is now the Campaign Manager for Jon Thorp. Austen sees independent candidates as a solution to the current dysfunction in Congress and has a goal of supporting enough independent candidates to deny both political parties a majority in the 2026 Midterms.

Read More

Political Violence Escalates: Charlie Kirk’s Assassination and the Fragility of Democracy

The appalling assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk while speaking at Utah Valley University marks another escalation in the dangerous normalization of political violence in the U.S. The murder of such a high-profile political figure underscores the fragility of democracy when disagreement is expressed not through debate or ballots but through the barrel of a gun. The tragedy must be understood as part of a broader pattern of radicalization, identity threat, and inadequate safeguards for candidates and elected officials.

After the assassination of a state legislator in Minnesota, we published an analysis on the psychological roots of political violence. That piece examined how violence is often driven more by deep psychological insecurity than by ideology, which political psychologists refer to as “defensive extremism.” Individuals who feel excluded, humiliated, or stripped of control can come to see violence as the only way to regain significance. This is especially true in contexts of rapid change, social isolation, or echo chambers that amplify grievances. As research indicates, the majority of violent acts are expressive rather than strategic eruptions of anger and fear, which are framed as moral or political necessities.

Keep ReadingShow less
For Whom the Bell Tolls: What Political Violence Reveals About Us

The bell tower from Mission Concepcion in San Antonio, Texas.

Getty Images, Gabriel Perez

For Whom the Bell Tolls: What Political Violence Reveals About Us

“Ask not for whom the bell tolls, the bell tolls for thee.”

The English poet, John Donne, wrote those words in the early 17th century, when it was customary for villagers to announce their fellow inhabitants’ deaths by the tolling of a single church bell.

Keep ReadingShow less
People looking at a TV screen, live broadcasting China's Victory Day military parade from Beijing on September 3, 2025 in Chongqing, China.

Elderly residents gather at a local civil affairs service center to watch the live broadcast of China's Victory Day military parade from Beijing on September 3, 2025 in Chongqing, China. The parade, commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, featured Chinese President Xi Jinping addressing the nation and reviewing troops and military equipment at Tiananmen Square

Getty Images, Cheng Xin

A New World Order Isn’t Coming, It’s Already Here − and This Is What It Looks Like

On Sept. 3, 2025, China celebrated the 80th anniversary of its victory over Japan by staging a carefully choreographed event in which 26 world leaders were offered a podium view of Beijing’s impressive military might.

The show of strength was deliberate and reignited a debate in Western mediaover whether we are on the cusp of a China-centric “new world order” to replace the U.S.-dominated international “rules-based order.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A globe resting on the very edge of a risen plank.

Foreign policy experts discuss the Israel-Gaza crisis, Iran tensions, Russia-Ukraine conflict, China’s strategy, and the shifting global order.

Getty Images, Daniel Grizelj

What in the World Is Going On?

In this moment, when global politics feel overwhelmed by unprecedented change and intense international upheaval, the Network for Responsible Public Policy convened foreign policy experts to discuss tariffs, conflicts between Israel and Gaza, Israel and Iran, the U.S. and Iran, Russia and Ukraine, North Korea’s role in all of this, and more. As program moderator and Axel Springer Fellow at the American Academy in Berlin, Gideon Rose put it at the outset, “Everybody's really interested in trying to figure out what is happening, what will happen next, what the consequences will be. The first point to make is that nobody knows anything. We are in uncharted territory in various areas.” Rose was joined by distinguished scholars, F. Gregory Gause III, Minxin Pei, Kathryn Stoner, and Shibley Telhami.

On Iran: Greg Gause discussed the situation in Iran and mentioned that, happily, the worst-case scenario based on the U.S. attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities did not happen, which is good for everyone. That worst-case scenario would have been an Iranian attack on Gulf oil facilities to bring in other actors to counter the U.S. and Israeli attacks. His concern with the current situation is that, with the U.S. President insisting that the nuclear facilities were obliterated, U.S. intelligence assessments must now be questioned, as they will necessarily be skewed to conform to the President’s preferred reality. Since it seems unlikely that the facilities were, in fact, destroyed, Gause believes that Iran now has an enormous incentive to race to develop a nuclear weapon. In what would become a main theme of this conversation (long-term stability even in the face of intense short-term upheaval), Gause mentioned that he does not believe that the current situation in Iran will result in a change to the Iranian regime.

Keep ReadingShow less