2016 campaign proves the US needs more political parties

Why is this year's march to presidential nomination so brutal and intense? Why do both major parties have 'outsider” candidates who are challenging the 'establishment?”

For a political scientist such as myself the answer is actually quite clear: There are not enough political parties in the United States.

The American two-party system assumes two things.

First we assume that politics is dichotomous left-right, liberal and conservative. Second, we want to believe that the left is a 'moderate” left and the conservatives are 'not too far to the right.” We say that Republican Barry Goldwater is proof that is a candidate drifts too far to the right he will lose big time. George McGovern is used as proof that if a presidential contender stands too far to the left he also will lose in a landslide.

However, deep divisions today plague both the Democratic and Republican parties.

There are huge numbers of Americans who actually are pretty far to the left in their ideology. They are showing up in astonishing record numbers to Bernie Sanders events. These voters do not think his ideas are 'too far” in any direction. They are like European Democratic Socialists who have actually formed governments in many countries (think the labor Party in the UK, the SPD in the oldest political party in Germany, the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party, or the Socialist parties in France and Italy.)

Another part of the Democratic Party, now supporting Hillary Clinton, is much more 'moderate.” And, there are even 'conservative” or 'Reagan Democrats” who are different from the party's 'progressives.”

Likewise there are huge numbers of very conservative Americans who have increasingly pushed the GOP to the right. The Tea Party, the Evangelical base, and the House Freedom Caucus are much more conservative than the remainder of the Republican Party. For example, the differences between, say, Ted Cruz and Mitt Romney are so huge that it seems dysfunctional to try to cram them into the same political party.

So what's the answer?

Clearly we need at least four political parties that have a realistic chance of winning.

Those who are very progressive should be able to vote for a candidate of a Liberal or even a Social Democratic Party and not try to 'pull the Democrats to the left” as has been happening this season with Hillary Clinton.

Those who are deeply conservative probably would be happier voting for a 'Conservative party” instead of trying to yank the entire Republican organization too far to the right.

When parties try to mash together voters who actually have deep and sincere philosophical differences the result is internal warfare. That's what we are seeing this season.

In 2016 Donald Trump is attracting a very complex group of voters. Some of my colleagues and my focus group believes that there may also be room for an 'Independent Party” or an 'American National Party” that satisfies the aspirations of those who perhaps are looking for a political organization that is not arrayed along the left-right axis.

We are one of the few countries in the world that has a two-party system. Can you imagine a grocery store isle with only two cereal choices? This is the United States of America. We expect lots of choice. Why not in our political parties?

' Steffen Schmidt is professor of political science at Iowa State University. Comments: steffenschmidt2005@gmail.com