A Moderate Election Plan for 2026 and Beyond

Let's End the Stranglehold of the Two-Party System

This post is specifically for the following groups of people:

• Democrats in predominantly Republican areas of the country.

• Republicans in predominantly Democratic areas of the country.

• Moderates and Independent candidates throughout the country.

• Anyone who wants to see more pragmatic politicians become more responsive to their constituents no matter where they are.

Throughout my life, I’ve heard people pine for a viable moderate third party. People genuinely don’t like the two options for what we have here. Most people don’t identify with either party (though they tend to lean towards one or the other). The largest segment of the electorate are the moderate voters in this country, yet both parties, based on both structural design, geopgraphic practicality and issue postures intended to further divide us, have stretched us as a country to the brink of disunity. We need something to bridge the divide, yet whom we select are more polarized than ever. To make matters worse, moderate candidates are running for office less frequently, realizing they have less and less of a window of getting through the party primary process.

And make no mistake, the problem is entirely due to the two party system. To get elected, you HAVE to be a member or get the support of one party or the other. Sure, there are unicorns that are able to sneak through here and there. However, for the most part, we have two, and only two parties. The activists of each of these groups only want to bring those parties even further apart, and are becoming further and further isolated from one another. Our media systems, our news sources, even our friends and families, are effectively politically siloed. This is detrimental to government and our society since to govern effectively we need to work across the aisle with one another. We need to make compromises for the greater good. And we have to do what’s best for our country. People forget that elections are job interviews for governance; when we become two separate constituencies further and further apart by elections, neither side can govern effectively.

A major issue of this political disconnect is the party primary system itself. These two parties are dominated by party activists catering to the most vocal fringes of the party itself. With no systemic counterbalance to favor more centrism and moderation, candidates continue to get more removed from the center, and more distant from the majority of voters. The ability of moderate candidates to get elected from one party or the other is becoming harder and harder to achieve, and the rest of us are forced to vote for the lesser evil of two options in the general election. This is no way to run a country.

And this is where third parties typically fail. Outside candidates are usually viable until the primaries occur, which get the attention, and then afterwards when the field whittles down to two candidates, become pariahs. The reason is apparent; third party candidates are usually seen as spoiler candidates. They divide one side of the vote and cause uncertainty in the likelihood for your side winning. They don’t even have to win a lot of votes to shift the vote from one party to the other. It’s entirely understandable.

There is a way around this though. There is a way to run moderate candidates and the key is getting the system to work in favor of it.

1. If you are a moderate or Democrat in an area represented by a far right conservative, run in a Republican primary, and if you lose, run as an Independent. Expose their extremism.

2. If you are a moderate or Republican in an area represented by a far left liberal, run in a Democratic primary, and if you lose, run as an Indepedent. Expose their extremism.

3. Swing districts represented by people not reflective of the values of that district are fair game, but if they are represented by reasonable, moderate candidates of either party, do not contest them. This goes for rational elected officials of both parties. In fact, the more successful we are in steps 1 and 2, the more moderate candidates can get elected in swing districts. If exteme candidates run in such districts, it’ll be easier to run and win the middle from them too.

So first off, we need to normalize moderate, pragmatic, independent candidates running for office. Make being and running as purple popular. We need to make it acceptable for candidates not associated with the regionally brand-toxic Democratic and Republican parties to be able to run viable camapaigns in those areas and providing acceptable alternatives to the extreme one party domination of those areas. A moderate Republican will increasingly never win a general election in an urban area; a moderate Democrat running as an independent might. Likewise, a conservative Democrat running in a rural area is increasingly unlikely to win; a moderate Republican demonstrating independent values could, and would likely pull voters away from the extremist MAGA candidates. In most of these places these days, those races aren’t even contested by opposing parties; a rising, viable independent movement would provide a window for alternatives to succeed. We’ve tolerated overzealous party activism resulting in unqualified and incompetent representation long enough. If a moderate or independent is viable, it is entirely likely the weaker party candidate will drop out and throw their support for the moderate against the extreme partisan candidate.

Then, when they get into office, because they are not as beholden to the extremist elements of the parties, they have the latitude and ability to govern much more effectively. We do that, and we develop a national purple “brand” for moderation, sound policy, sound temperment, and quality candidates. The more we elect, the stronger the middle grows in D.C.. It no longer becomes the crazy caucus holding things up, it becomes a small group of centrist minded leaders either side can do business with.

Don’t think it will work? Guess again. In 1998 when the two major parties put up a liberal nepo-baby and an ambitious party switcher for Governor of Minnesota, charismatic Jesse Ventura ran for and won the election advocating for basic common sense. His administration would draw on quality competent individuals from both parties. Moderate candidate Adam Frisch ran as a moderate Democratic candidate vrs. Lauren Boebert in 2022 and lost by only 300 votes. Had he been instead an expressed Independent (untainted with the connection to Joe Biden and more liberal Democrats) with a separate Democratic Party supporting him, he might have won. He was such a viable candidate in the next cycle, Boebert had to switch districts to avoid losing a Congressional seat. Lisa Murkowski won her Senate seat after losing a primary to a Tea Party Republican; she won it as a WRITE-IN candidate as an independent. Angus King ran in Maine as an Independent for Senator, and when it became apparent that the Democratic candidate was not viable, he was forced to leave the race and King received Democratic support, winning election; he’s been there ever since. This can be a template across America.

We also have to represent the middle collectively, which means drawing relatively equally from the left and the right.¹ However, this does not have to be as a collective ideological party competing in every district under a platform. Competing in both Republican and Democratic areas, in opposition to both, results in the correct impression that this is a pragmatic movement of the center. By competing in a primary against the more extreme candidates, those extreme candidates are likely to say more alienating things that can be used against them in a general election. The threat of potentially losing the moderate votes in general elections will result in more moderate candidates actually making it past primaries as well.

Most importantly, we would be growing the pool of practical dealmakers willing to work together across the aisle to get work done for the American people. American politics has been paralyzed for far too long because neither side can get a governing and functioning majority in Congress, and likely won’t for some time. Electing moderates of both parties, and growing that pool of middle of the electorate Representatives and Senators helps ensure that there are people who can collaborate with the two parties, working in conjunction to get things done again. Ultimately, it promotes a more unified government and country.

And in these harrowing times, a more unified country is what we so desperately need.

PurpleAmerica’s Cultural Corner

Something that should sttongly be considered and supported is Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). At first, I didn’t care for the idea much because I thought it would encourage people to vote for more extreme candidates without consequence. In practice, it does the opposite, revealing the truly majority choices of the body politic.

Ranked Choice Voting allows you to vote for your second and third options in various elections. People vote on a first ballot for whomever they want. If no candidate receives a majority, then the lowest vote-getting candidate is eliminated and those that voted for them have their second choice included, and so on until a candidate receives a majority vote. Right now, it’s predominantly used in local government elections. However, it seems to result in a truer representation of where the electorate is, often resulting in more moderate candidates winning. But it’s even more effective than that; you see far more issue diversity and broader representation of people running for office, and even winning. This is how democracy is supposed to work.

After having witnessed the effectiveness and quality of results of ranked choice voting, I would highly encourage it as a means for elections, perhaps even in primaries and open general elections.

PurpleAmerica’s Obscure Fact of the Day

The Republican Red and Democrat Blue traces itself back to the 2000 election. Before that, different networks would handle it differently (the first election I personally remember, Reagan in 1980 and again in 1984, had Republicans as blue for instance).

But with the prolonged outcome of the 2000 election, and the map largely reiterated for six weeks AFTER the election, the colors stuck. The one that was most referenced was Tim Russert’s NBC board, because along with a dry erase board, he predicted it earlier that night that it would all come down to who won Florida. Following that election, people began to reference Republicans as “red state” and Democrats as “blue state” much more frequently.

PurpleAmerica’s Final Word on the Subject

Let’s make it popular to be purple. https://www.zazzle.com/store/purpleamerica/products

I’m Purple, and I’m Proud of it.

LIKE WHAT YOU SEE? MAKE SURE TO SUBSCRIBE AND SHARE!!!

Footnotes and Fun Stuff

1. People may think that’s impossible and leads to ideological inconsistency, and in some ways it would. But more important than that, it would grow the quantity of reasonable, practical people in the center of the electorate, which would make our politics work better. Ideology takes a back seat to practicality.