It's Time for a PurpleAmerica Third Party

Democrats Can't Win Outside the Coasts; Their Coalition is Shrinking, Progressives are Uncompromising. We Need a Party That Can Compete Everywhere

2026 is shaping up to be a “Blue Wave” year. In fact, judging by the level of anger out there, it should be a Blue Tsunami. I want you to look at this though. It’s the Senate seats up for election and their current likelihood of switching parties:

All that energy out there, and there is only one GOP held swing LeanR/LeanD pickup opportunity in a state where the incumbent, Susan Collins, had pulled it out many times before under the same circumstances, and two toss-ups in states Trump won that are generally solid red, which some reliable analysts are saying are lean or likely R at this point. The kicker is that even if they win all three of those, Democrats are still in the minority—they need another seat because Vice President J.D. Vance would decide tiebreakers. And to top it off, they are going to have tough re-election fights in Georgia protecting Jon Ossoff, holding Jeanne Shaheen’s seat in N.H. and Gary Peters’ seat in Michigan, which is also a Toss-Up. You can add to that list Minnesota, where a slew of progressive candidates are lining up to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory over a very winnable seat held by retiring Tina Smith. Add it all up and there are more potential seats Dems can lose than they can win this cycle, despite the favorable environment.

So to reiterate in plainer terms, despite all the anger, all the energy, all the anti-Trump sentiment out there, Democrats are not likely to win the Senate in 2026, needing only 3 pickups. Think about that. Why? 2026 should be a cakewalk for them. It should be just an easy walk in the park to get three seats given this environment. Why couldn’t they get three measly little seats, why couldn’t they compete elsewhere? I want you to take another look above and note the Republican seats up for election: Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, OHIO! Democrats have utterly lost the ability to talk to working men and women, particularly in the middle of the country. Based on everything I have seen the last two years and since the election, they seem completely inept or unwilling to even try to correct that either. It wasn’t long ago that the Senate Majority Leader came from South Dakota, and that Louisiana was a solidly blue state. Democrats held onto West Virginia’s TWO Senate seats for a long time (Robert Byrd and Joe Manchin); Progressives revelled at practically kicking Manchin out of the party.

And if you think it gets better in 2028, I have some bad news for you:

That amounts to maybe a pickup opportunity in Wisconsin, and a lot of swing areas Dems have to defend hard elsewhere in a Presidential cycle.

And to discuss anything pragmatic online about winning elections only draws the ire of the bluest of most hardcore progressive activists. Sure, they’re principled and idealistic, will try and wow you with their philosophies and name drop whoever makes them sound more erudite at the time, but they simply DO NOT understand the practical aspects of winning elections. They have pie in the sky expectations of what SHOULD be done, but are never considering the compromises that have to made to get there, nor the people they have to convince to vote their way to do so. They’ll talk to you about how misogynistic men are and then wonder why they don’t get more mens’ votes, then think the answer is for a leftist version of Joe Rogan. They’ll condescend to any middle income earner with only a high school diploma, and then condescend some more when they say those that didn’t vote their way are just stupid. Worst of all, they’ll bark at seasoned professionals and intelligent degree holders online who know better and offer more nuanced and subjective positions, and then wonder why nobody listens to them, because they’re the ones with all the answers.

Democrats no longer understand their working class roots and the middle of the country, and their brand outside of the coasts and metro areas is atrocious. Today, they think “working class” is a college grad, sitting in a cubicle, who wants the student loans for her English Literature degree from Bowdoin or NYU paid off. It’s not like people in the plains states are indoctrinated MAGA devotees, but Democrats just don’t talk to them, don’t know how to talk to them, don’t even try to win them over, and have absolutely zero organization that can be effective in half of these states. What’s more, if they do talk AT them, they try and make the same arguments there that they do in uber-liberal NYC or San Francisco. They bundle their issues together in a way that is toxic in most states now. They can’t win the Senate because they can’t appeal broadly anymore; instead their reflex is to try and argue how unfair the Senate is by offering two Senators from each state, as if the country wasn’t called the “United” States. This is the same argument they make about the Electoral College, and their numbers will only get worse there as large populous states shed Electoral Votes for redder ones, as is currently happening. The more they lose, the more their inclination is to argue the system is wrong (which will not lead to any change whatsoever) rather than try to win votes, and then they end up losing by even more.

The fractions within the Democratic party—those between pragmatic moderates and idealistic progressives— are becoming too tenuous to keep held together, as witnessed by the events of Senator Schumer’s decision to forego a government shutdown. Progressives wanting to FIGHT! Trumpism to the nth degree have no sense of the game their playing, they only know to defy Trumpism even if it means going for it on 4th and 30 from their own 5 yard line. Moderates hate Trump too, and understand not every situation is ideal for making a stand, such as the potential shutdown. Punting in that instance makes sense, and you can fight harder and stronger from a better position on the field. That didn’t stop any of the fallout or Monday morning quarterbacking coming from the far left though.

On top of that, the Democratic Party S.O.P. is to take a person who got out of these areas, went to an Ivy League school and took part in Democratic Governance circles, and then send them back to their hometowns to run for office. This has more of the stench of carpetbagger than it does a “home grown person of the people.” Candidates have to come from their districts, know the local regional issues, know the PEOPLE there, and speak to them in a way that isn’t condescending like a McKinsey consultant astroturfing a campaign in Topeka. We need more Jon Testers out there. What did the popular Montanan Senator in? His association with Kamala Harris and the Democrats. Makes you wonder why Bernie Sanders and AOC are traveling across the country on an “Anti-Oligarchy Tour,” whatever the f**k that means, until you realize they’re just showing up in solid blue areas. It’s not hard to shake your fist and say “Oligarchy, bad” like some caveman troll in Denver, it’s another thing entirely to go into an area Democrats consistently lose or flat out ignore and give them reasons to vote for you. Wake me up when you see them stop in Big Sky Country or in the Nebraska 3rd District and draw a crowd.

For these reasons, we need to start considering a new Purple Party separate from the Democrats, and that can attract independents and moderate Republicans. Those in the middle of the country need an alternative to the Republicans and MAGA, and the Democrats in their current incarnation are NOT it.

What a PurpleAmerica Party Would Mean

Splitting off into a “PurpleAmerica Party” would have a two pronged effect:

1. It would distinguish moderate, sensible regional candidates who can compete against Republicans in the middle of the country from Democrats.

2. It would also create a moderate alternative to progressives and liberals in solidly blue areas.

Single party rule, even at regional levels, is detrimental to a healthy body politic. Elected Republicans in safe Republican districts, and elected Democrats in safe Democratic districts leads to corruption, ineptitude, incompetence and poor public administration. There needs to be alternatives. A moderate Purple Party can help deliver that.

A party that is unbound by the top down management styles of the major parties, and that is a loose affiliation of regional interests considering regional issues, can help bridge the ever widening gap of Dem Progressives and MAGA Republicans. In their core, most Americans don’t want either of those two options; they want to be heard, they want their problems to be considered and they want effective governance. The single largest group of voters is not Democrat or Republican, it’s people disliking of BOTH major parties. They may want less government bureacuracy, but they do want the government that is there to work effectively. Where they want more government, they want it to ensure a fair, meritorious, and judicious result with as little intrusion as possible. These are not hard things to provide, but to do so we have to get off the “THEY SAID—THEY SAID” carousel that exists in our current political dynamic. A Purple Party can provide that.

We all want a party “of the people, by the people, for the people” but D.C. seems less and less resembling of those people, and the primary process is a major reason why. Gerrymandering and districts favoring incumbency has made a primary campaign from a candidate’s extreme the only thing to fear. Worse yet, it serves as a reason for elected officials not to moderate or act judiciously, but rather play to just their side of the electorate, further and further from the median. Unlike trying to win in the Democatic or Republican primaries, a third party would provide a solid refuge for sound, moderate politicians speaking plainly and intelligently about the issues that can provide a true alternative in a General Election to the fringes of the spectrum.

“That’ll Never Work!”— Guess Again

There are always those naysayers who claim voting third party is throwing your vote away. Well, I come from a state that actually had a pretty effective Third Party Governor:

That’s right, Jesse Ventura.

To be sure, many kind of look at him as an anomaly but when you dig down into it, everything I talked about is there. Uninspired by the two candidates, Democratic nepo-baby Hubert Humphrey III and party flip-flopper Dem Turned Conservative Norm Coleman, Jesse Ventura entered the race offering a rational alternative. As the race came down to it’s final days and people realized Jesse wasn’t joking and that he was actually serious, offering serious points and issues, his support surged and he won the race.

How did he do as Governor? Pretty good actually. He put bright minds and established figures from both parties into cabinet positions. He listened thoughtfully to their advice and provided a legitimate moderate administration that worked for most Minnesotans. He finally got through a Light Rail Transit bill that partisans would go back and forth on and never progress on. He achieved a budget surplus and gave regular tax refund checks to constituents. He set Minnesota on the path towards marijuana legalization. All in all, despite the constant media circus, most Minnesotans think Ventura did a pretty good job as Governor. You can see a great Minnesota Public Television piece about the Ventura years here.

As it turns out, providing a serious alternative from the two bland, boring, constantly nagging partisan fringes not only can win but succeed. Where did he get the votes? Mainly from moderates in the metro area and outlying suburbs, pulling from both parties, but slightly more from disaffected Dems:

Now am I saying you have to go out and be like Jesse Ventura and that he should be the standard? No. In fact, his media antagonism and bulldog persona worked against him sometimes. But what it does prove, and what I would strongly support and propose you consider, is that moderate candidates splitting the difference between the two extremes can work. Providing a legitimate alternative to very divided parties, or even a moderate alternative to single party rule, can be successful and can lead to great government administration.

The people who tell you otherwise are the same people who have proven their ineptitude. They don’t want you to slip away, because they still want you to go further and further right or left. Don’t fall for it. They need to come to you, where you live, and where your local issues are. If they are unwilling or unable to do that, or they flat out are too toxic to even be considered as a viable option, it’s time to think of alternatives.

The PurpleAmerica Party is that Alternative.

PurpleAmerica’s Obscure Fact of the Day

Historically, third parties don’t have lasting appeal. This is because popular third parties have their focus and energy taken from mainstream parties who adapt to what propelled the third parties in the first place.¹ Third Parties get their votes from SOMEWHERE, and usually the mainstream party loser of the election co-opts those issues pushing them and incorporates them into their platform. From that standpoint, the third party withers away.

Nonetheless, third parties are usually the first ones to get issues noticed by the mainstream parties and serve that role to get action done on them.

1850s- Republican Party— Abolitionism

1900s- Various Parties- Financial Reform, Worker Protections

1920s- Prohibition (eventually repealed)

1960s- Various Civil Rights parties

1992- Ross Perot- National Debt, Fiscal Austerity

1996- Pat Buchanan- Immigration

2000- Ralph Nader- Environmental Issues

2010s- Legal Marijuana Now Party

PurpleAmerica’s Final Word on the Subject

Let’s give it to the former wrestler and Predator actor who claimed “I Ain’t Got Time to Bleed.”

A few bonus quotes too…

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

Footnotes and Fun Stuff

1. If a Purple Party is successful in just one election cycle, and the rationales and ideas to moderate are taken up by one or both of the mainstream parties, then that would be a success. The Purple Party is about bringing the parties to the middle, and if it can do that, then that is a very good thing.