1hundredsixty8

My previous two posts in this space presented a hypothesis that American politics may be on the brink of forfeiting its allegiance to the two-party system, that the havoc Donald Trump has visited upon the Republican Party might soon have a spill-over effect on the Democrats. Bernie Sanders’ has rallied a committed cadre of progressives into significant force in the current Democratic campaign. Hillary Clinton, arguably qualified technically but faced with problematic trust issues and high unfavorables in polling, brings a traditional, centrist mien to the stump, an unexciting comparison with the passionate Sanders and a Little Red Riding Hood to the wolf that is the vulgarian Trump.

I must reveal the New York Times had previously chosen not to accept my submission of the piece that I posted on April 8 (“Can Donald Trump Destroy the Two-Party System?). I can only guess at the reason, but I do think the argument was deserving of discussion. Ensuing events have only bolstered my position as I pointed out last week.

Today, Jennifer Rubin, the Washington Post’s conservative blogger, made a similar case (“We really have four parties, so why not four candidates?”).  She fires an opening salvo- “Both major parties have fractured”- then proceeds to enumerate the constituent groups housed within each party’s coalition. She concludes that each of these groups- she lists five, by the way- should have their own Presidential candidate. One constituency is already represented by an established political party, the Libertarians. Her argument is that this segregation would permit these sub-parties to “independently test their electability.”

Ms. Rubin also points out that divvying up the electorate in a Presidential campaign this way creates the problematic possibility that no one candidate gains a majority of electoral votes, and the final choice would rest with the House of Representatives. That is a valid, short-term consideration. But the long-term consequence could very well be a makeover of the political landscape. The existence of four or five stable parties would be reflected in the composition of the Congress. In turn, Congress would take on more of a parliamentary cast, and governing coalitions would emerge. Presidents, CEO’s of the executive branch, might see their powers attenuated, and governance would revert to the legislative branch. It may very well be that the parties form alliances for choosing Presidential candidates- in effect, hiring a management team.

Having the legislative branch be preeminent seems to have been the purpose of the designers of this experimental republic. I would love to get the reaction of Constitutional Originalists to the idea of multi-party politics.