Last week was a doozy that reminded us that the world is not in a good place. Half the country believes we are in a “golden age,” led by “THE most consequential President in history,” while the other half is marching in the street, decrying fascism. The debate is spirited, but unproductive.
Amidst this debate, some suggest that the problem is not Donald Trump or the Democrats, but both. The theory, and that’s all it is, suggests that both sides are to blame. Both existing political parties, they claim, sow division by vilifying the other with name-calling and an unwillingness to compromise. The solution offered is the creation of a third party, one that is presumed to eschew division and commit itself to finding common ground.
I’m not buying it. As I wrote last week, I find Donald Trump wrong on just about everything. To me and many others, there is no common ground on civil rights. You either believe in equality or you don’t.
There is also no common ground on providing due process to deportees, thousands of whom have been arrested but not charged with a crime. I reject any “compromise” that gives due process to some people but not others.
Everyone—no exceptions, no labels—deserves the right to be heard before being herded onto a military aircraft and sent to a brutal prison in El Salvador for the crime of being in the United States.
I also doubt that those of us who call ourselves independents are ready to join a party that advocates positions on some issues, but not others. For example, the third party may embrace what it calls a middle ground on tariffs, but not the need for Diversity, Inclusion and Equity programs. That will be a non-starter for many independents. They will reject all three parties and remain independent.
I am also amused at the concept that there is a middle ground on a sufficient number of issues for a political party to find one. God, for example, was not looking for the common ground when promulgating the Ten Commandments. Imagine if the Sixth commandment said it is okay to kill someone if they covet your spouse.
And then there is the issue of leadership. What type of leader wants to head a third party dedicated to compromise? A “leader” who has no clear vision of the future other than quelling fierce political debate. No thanks.
Put more simply, authentic leaders may not want to compromise on transgender rights, racial equity, and inclusion, and the most fundamental of all American issues, democracy.
Can you imagine a third party that wants to embrace part of President Trump’s aggressive grab of executive power? The rationale would be that there is a middle ground between “excessive red tape” and things like protecting the environment. I live on the Eastern Shore. I reject compromises on climate change.
I also don’t want to find common ground on the war in Ukraine. Putin started the war and is a war criminal. Full stop. There is no common ground. I want nothing to do with a party that is ready to “move past” Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in the name of “ending the divide over the war.”
A few final thoughts. How does a third party guarantee that it will not lose its way and become as divisive as some advocates for a new party describe today’s Democrats and Republicans? It can’t. Humans are fallible. Whatever has led to the rottenness of the existing parties will, I guarantee you, eventually infect the third party.
And let’s look at the people who are described as likely to embrace a third party. They are people who lack strongly held beliefs on many issues. I call these people “lukewarm,” the type of people who may be slightly troubled by Trump’s mass due-process-free deportations but not troubled enough to protest them or speak out. I don’t want “lukewarm” people to be setting the nation’s policies. America must move forward, or it will move backwards.
So, if you are an advocate for a third party, please reconsider.
A viable third-party movement will accomplish one thing: strengthen the current cult-like Republican party. If you want 20 years of Trumpism and MAGA, quit the Democratic party and guarantee Republican majorities for the foreseeable future.
If, like me, you are unhappy with today’s politics, consider working to fix what you see as wrong in your current party. Or, if you are an independent, join one of the parties and work to reform it.
J.E. Dean writes on politics, government but, too frequently, on President Trump. A former counsel on Capitol Hill and public affairs consultant, Dean also writes for Dean’s Issues & Insights on Substack.
Art Cecil says
“wrong on just about everything” So what is he right on? A tricky question.
John Dean says
You are right, especially because Trump often takes credit where no credit is due.
In any case, thank you for reading the article.
Nancy LeBrun says
I think the frustration lies with the inadequate Democratic response. They have been ineffective and terribly weak. I understand they are at a disadvantage in Congress, but few of them have done much to harness the power of the protests. See Atlantic article today “The Democratic Party Slides Into Irrelevance.” That’s why a third party is attractive, at least to me.
John Dean says
I share your frustration with Democrats not yet fully responding to Trump. I believe that will change and the party will coalesce around a leader that can win in 2028. In terms of 2026, I believe the Democrats will take the House, and the talk about the party “evaporating” or “dying” will stop.
As I wrote, I oppose a third party because it will help the Republicans and Trump. The Democrats are currently split between progressives and moderates. The Republicans, unfortunately, are solidly behind their leader. Thus, any third party is likely to attract more former Democrats than Republicans.
In any case, thanks for reading my piece and for sharing your thoughts. I know many people who agree with you.
We do not need to make it easier for Trump to stamp out democracy.
Wilson Dean says
This article successfully makes a key point: the issues that divide the two parties today are such that any attempt to find common ground through a third party is doomed to failure. As the author points out, so many of these issues are simply an “either/or” question without a halfway point.
The yearning for a third party is understandable when one looks at the state of our two parties today. Republican policies today are largely driven by efforts to recapture the perceived loss of white preference, relying heavily on a large bloc of supporters willing to accept lies and misinformation. On the other side, many decry the absence of any coherent approach coming from the Democrats, yet to me that does not seem particularly surprising. Democrats have zero power right now, whether it be in the Presidency, the Senate, the House, or the Supreme Court. Democrats do need to go through the very messy task of finding a manageable number of potential leaders who can articulate effective alternative policies by the end of this year that can resonate with voters. If Democrats can do that, then they will put themselves in a strong position to regain entry back into the power structure by taking the House of Representatives. If they fail to do that, the Trump cult will simply continue to dominate the poltical spectrum.
John Dean says
As always, a great comment. Thanks for it. You are correct that one of the first tasks for Democrats is to identify a manageable number of potential leaders. I believe they will do this. I’m optimistic about the future of the party.
HR Worthington says
Succinctly, I would put your conundrum as follows: Your basic premise is that “Donald Trump [is] wrong on just about everything.” By definition, even if the people who voted for him didn’t agree with him on everything, they had to agree with him on something. Whatever that “something” may be, you hold that they are irreconcilably wrong and must be rejected. Inconveniently, President Dictator won the popular vote and the electoral college by a healthy margin. Thus, it implies that this recalcitrance will result in little more than further articles which have no effect other than the generation of amusing comments by people who mixed up their medications again.
In the end, your objection is that a third party, formed by people who disagree with you on a few matters, would deny YOUR party, one obviously imbued with a wisdom divinely bestowed, from taking and holding power. That makes these turncoat miscreants moral inferiors on par with Trump himself. They are “lukewarm” and we “don’t want ‘lukewarm’ people to be setting the nation’s policies.” (Radicals, I suppose, are a far better choice than moderates.) At least I know what you mean when you say you don’t want to compromise on democracy. Per usual, it is only democracy when you get your way. You don’t want democracy, you want hegemony. So much the easier to throw people in jail for not complying with social distancing the next time you go to the beach. (No, I have not forgotten that article.)
“Consider working to fix what you see as wrong in your current party…” I won’t hold my breath. I look forward to the piece you will never ever write addressing that. That is the genius of Trump; all he has to do is keep you outraged and looking at him so that you will never look in the mirror. If you did, as you rightly suggest, he might not be President, and we would have a Democratic Party worth joining. Alas, you fall for the ruse every time, and so the court jesters on MSNBC line their pockets. It’s your Party and you can cry if you want to.
God save the King. -HR
John Dean says
I’m not sure how to respond here–so I won’t, other than to say I hope you are referring to King Charles.
Bob Parker says
While Mr. Dean makes many strong points against the desirability and viability of a 3rd party, he misses what may be the strongest argument against it – that being unlike many other democracies, the U.S. does not have a parliamentary system in which the government out of necessity and structure has a majority in the legislature that determines the head of government. We have an entrenched 2 party system in which 3rd parties have no chance of gaining control of Congress or of the Presidency. As the Republican party rose from the remnants of the Whigs, our 2 party system continued. Neither the Bull Moose nor Dixicrats succeeded in attaining a national following and while the Green and Libertarian parties have national followings, neither accomplish anything other than serving as “spoilers” in selected elections. No, the answer to our dysfunctional political establishment is not to create a 3rd party but rather to create more informed and thoughtful electorate. We need to ask tough questions of our candidates and then listen, really LISTEN, to their answers so we can elect individuals who are as thoughtful as we, who will represent our positions, and who understand the need for and power of compromise. For this, we also need to have, and support, an inquiring and objective press.
John Dean says
Great points. Thank you for raising them. Important information to consider.
Reed Fawell 3 says
You’re like a man standing in the rain year after year yelling for a change in the weather. you’re stuck that way. Trump will retire, a Republican will replace him, the Democrat party will have evaporated, and you’ll be writing your articles here saying nothing different from what you just said above, year after year.
John Dean says
I hope you are suggesting that Trump will retire before the end of his current term. That would be a great thing.
While J.D. Vance is, in some ways, less dangerous than Trump (not as crazy or corrupt, IMHO), he will also be a disaster, but likely would watch less TV, play less golf, and show more caution in soliciting luxury aircraft from foreign countries.
I doubt what I will be writing articles “saying nothing year after year.” Eventually, my editor would put an end to that, I hope.
Barbara Denton says
You are so correct.
Jim Wilkins says
I agree with you on everything you said and although a third party may not be the answer, how do we fix what’s broken in our country. My feeling ( not a revelation)is that we suffer from a fatal flaw: income inequality. And until we address this problem the country will remain divided. What is driving it? I believe the single biggest driver is the influence of money in electoral politics. Until campaign finance is reformed the influence of big money in politics will continue to further drive inequality and divide us. This is a problem for both parties and doesn’t seem to be likely going away unless one of them comes to its senses and realizes that people are fed up with greed and again this applies to republicans and democrats. The only path I see is for one of the parties (as a group) to disavow big money funding of their campaigns. Can this happen? Will this ever happen? Who knows?
Jeff Staley says
I find your observations insightful,sage and pragmatic. Thanks.
John Dean says
Thank you for your kind words. Much appreciated.
I appreciate you reading the piece.
Mickey Terrone says
Hello John. Great, thought-provoking article. I’m with you against a third party, which would merely diffuse opposition to the Trumpists. This is precisely what they want as a minority party – to divide and conquer the political opposition.
The Democratic Party has always had the advantage of being the basic majority party. yet it continues to bear the burden of the Big Tent, and that is, channeling so many somewhat divergent views. The liberal mind derives (as you know) from “libera”, the latin for “free” or “open”. We’ve rarely remained on one clear track in regional or national elections. Plus, we want it all and we want it all now, which isn’t realistic anymore because Republicans have gamed the House of Representatives to where they are easily able to maintain a modicum of seats to enable them to obstruct meaningful legislation.
We’ve become frustrated and inured to ongoing frustration at our inability to pass sweeping legislation when we seemingly have the opportunities, as in Obama’s first term. Thus, many have become frustrated with the party and its leadership annd perhaps would consider a third party.
I hold that the Democratic Party, while we have had our issues with herding cats in Congress, in state houses and among the electorate in general, is managing its traditional affairs fairly effectively. The issue is that we are no longer being opposed by a political party. The Democratic Party operation is opposed by Trump and his autocratic, fascist cult which doesn’t tolerate internal debate or dissenting opinion. Dissent over key issues is now met with threatening phone calls, primary threats and death threats.
Very few Republicans have the personal courage to openly speak out against Trump’s often self-serving whims. The nature of the Republican opposition has changed and we haven’t. And despite the horrendous nightmare experience of Trump’s first term, we still failed to circle the wagons adequately to outvote the minority party. We allowed ourselves to become divided over the war in Palestine, abortion, finding the perfect candidate, macho masculinity and the mirages of Trump’s empty promises.
Will we ever learn? Perhaps, but it may already be too late for democracy. I’m confident that if Trump reads the polls and he sees he’s going to lose the House and/or the Senate, he’ll call some national emergency and cancel the elections next year. He’s already got 4 guaranteed voted on SCOTUS.
Until every Democrat and Independent voter grasps the big picture of what is at stake in this country, our democratic republic will give way to dictatorship. Democrats (and Independents) had better start marching in step in preparation for 2026 if it isn’t too late already.
Deirdre LaMotte says
There is a group of national never Trumpers who are working on developing a new Republican Party, as the GOP no longer reflects the traditional Party of sane fiscal policies and strength internationally . It is Trump, period, or rather the Steven Miller faction that despise democracy. This group is determined to get the Party with the times on social issues, that is imperative to them. They also are looking at a 20 year lead time.
They also happily acknowledges that Democrats will win the House in 2026 and they will continue to support normal thinking people, not fascists.
I agree with them. Our nation needs two parties who would uphold our Constitution.
Barbara Denton says
Dream on Alice.
John Dean says
Mickey, excellent comment. Very sound advice to all of us who fear America is about to lose its democracy. We can’t let that happen.
I hope as many Spy readers as possible will read your comment.