Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The Paradox for Independents

Opinion

The Paradox for Independents

A handheld American Flag.

Canva Images

Political independents in the United States are not chiefly moderates. In The Independent Voter, Thomas Reilly, Jacqueline Salit, and Omar Ali make it clear that independents are basically anti-establishment. They have a "mindset" that aims to dismantle the duopoly in our national politics.

I have previously written about different ways that independents can obtain power in Washington. First, they can get elected or converted in Washington and advocate with their own independent voices. Second, they can seek a revolution in which they would be the most dominant voice in Washington. And third, a middle position, they can seek a critical mass in the Senate especially, namely five to six seats, which would give them leverage to help the majority party get to 60 votes on policy bills.


Since they do not speak with one voice—after all, there are about 60 million independents or unaffiliated voters in the United States, not to mention a large percentage of the 85 million 'eligible' voters who are not 'registered' to vote—there is no one path they should all follow.

The most reasonable path forward for independents is to pursue their independence from both major parties even as they advocate for what I have called a tripartisan system of governance in Washington. This would be a system in which there are three political forces in Washington, not two. The time has come for the United States to jettison the goal of bipartisanship and replace it with the goal of tripartisanship. Bipartisanship is not the goal in multiparty democracies throughout the world.

The paradox for independents is that in order to achieve their independence from the Democratic and Republican Parties they must commit to working with them and not trying to overtake them. Like women in progressive quarters in the last two generations, political independents must separate from the two powerful parties even as they seek to create a new relationship with them. The woman who needs her own identity over and above mother and wife, notably via having a career, may seek this identity even as she seeks to transform her marriage with her husband. Of course, some women may divorce their husbands and find new husbands or marry women or not marry at all. Yet, there is a model where the dominated woman, whose identity is suppressed, affirms her identity and demands that her spouse affirm it, too.

Political independents running for the U.S. Senate in 2026, for example, may advocate for the tripartisan ideal and the creation of an Independent Caucus in the U.S. Senate. They may run against Democrats and Republicans in their own state, or like Dan Osborn in his 2024 Nebraska Senate race, run as an Independent against a Republican. Yet, part of their campaign would be devoted to advocating for the tripartisan ideal.

By the time there are five or six independents in the U.S. Senate—Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) are among the handful of Republicans in the Senate who might convert—this Independent Caucus would create the foundation for what Charles Wheelan called a "fulcrum strategy," only he was focused on electing centrist members of a Centrist Party.

Tripartisans should not blast the Trump administration. The Democrats will take care of that. Indeed, the two parties are destined to fight bitterly with each other for the next four years. Tripartisans must be committed to overcoming the intense polarization in Washington and pave the way for the post-Trump years. Of course, many Republicans are hoping for post-Trump years that sustain the populist, ultra-right-wing perspective being unveiled every day. The tripartisan ideal can actually help either majority party.

To be clear: Because tripartisans are not ideologically aligned, they are not passionate about the same policies. Rather, they would each support various, though not all, policy bills (ranging from climate change to entitlement reform) because they want to end polarization and dysfunction in Washington as well as keep their seats in the U.S. Senate and the Independent Caucus.

The tripartisan model is designed to transcend the battlefield of American politics over the next two to six, and probably ten years, and integrate political independents with their own voices, attitudes, and ideas into the political process. If Senator Murkowski converted to an Independent in the first 100 days of the Trump presidency, that would be a major development: One small step for the U.S. Senate, one giant leap for the United States.

Dave 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.


Read More

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose
white red and blue textile

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose

As the United States approaches both a consequential election cycle and the 250th anniversary of its founding, Americans stand at a crossroads the framers anticipated but hoped we would never reach: a moment when citizens must decide whether to allow the Republic to erode or restore it through vigilance. This is not about left or right. It is about whether we still share a common vision of the country we want to be — and whether we still believe in the same Republic.

The Founders never imagined “the land of the free” as a place dependent on benevolent leaders. They built a system in which the people — not the government — were the safeguards against overreach. James Madison warned that “the accumulation of all powers…in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny,” a reminder that freedom depends on restraint, not trust in any single individual. George Washington pledged that the Constitution would remain “the guide which I will never abandon,” signaling that loyalty to the Republic must always outweigh loyalty to any leader. These were not ceremonial lines. They were instructions — a blueprint for preventing institutional strain, polarization, and distrust we see today.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person holding a sign in front of the U.S. capitol that reads, "We The People."

The nation has reached a divide in the road—a moment when Americans must decide whether to accept a slow weakening of the Republic or insist on the principles that have held it together for more than two centuries

Getty Images

A Republic Under Strain—And a Choice Ahead

Americans feel something shifting beneath their feet — quieter than crisis but unmistakably a strain. Many live with a steady sense of uncertainty, conflict, and the emotional weight of issues that seem impossible to escape. They feel unheard, unsafe, or unsure whether the Republic they trust is fading. Friends, relatives, and former colleagues say they’ve tried to look away just to cope, hoping the turmoil will pass. And they ask the same thing: if the framers made the people the primary control on government, how will they help set the Republic back on a steadier path?

Understanding the strain Americans are experiencing is essential, but so is recognizing the choice we still have. Madison’s warning offers the answer the framers left us: when trust erodes and power concentrates, the Constitution turns back to the people—not as a slogan, but as a structural reality.

Keep ReadingShow less
Latest Attack Threatening President Trump Reflects Rising Political Violence in US

President Donald Trump speaks at the White House on April 25, 2026, after the cancellation of the annual White House Correspondents Association Dinner.

Latest Attack Threatening President Trump Reflects Rising Political Violence in US

For the third time in three years, Donald Trump has come under threat by an attacker. Many facts remain unclear after a gunman stormed the Washington Hilton on April 25, 2026, during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

As the investigation into the shooting continues, Alfonso Serrano, The Conversation’s politics and society editor, spoke with James Piazza, a political violence scholar at Penn State, about what is driving the rise of political violence in the U.S. and what can be done about it.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democracy Requires Losing. Americans Are Forgetting That.
an american flag hanging from a pole in front of a building
Photo by Calysia Ramos on Unsplash

Democracy Requires Losing. Americans Are Forgetting That.

Americans believe in democracy. What they don’t believe in is losing.

That distinction matters. Democracy depends on its participants’ willingness to accept loss. Without that, elections stop resolving conflict and start producing it.

Keep ReadingShow less