Until a citizen registers to vote without identifying a party, democracy will not truly exist. The two-party system will not be broken until all can register without being required to identify with one party or the other.

It does not mean one cannot join a party, it only means the government cannot require that information from a voter. (This is a privacy issue).

It would free people to vote for individuals whom they feel will represent them and their community. Candidates would actually have to communicate with the voting public to gain their vote and not assume party affiliation will suffice.

It is doubtful the two-party system will last beyond the last of the Baby Boom generation now holding power. As Generation X'ers begin ascending the ladder of power in the next 5 to 10 years, it is unquestionable that an overhaul of the system is in the offing.

This will be particularly interesting to see with America's conservative movement. Democrats today are much like they were 30 years ago. Young conservatives, however, tend to be more Libertarian than Republican.

I do not say this simply because I myself am a Libertarian. I say this as a twenty-something who frequents conservative circles.

Many of us young 'conservatives' are actually quite socially liberal. We are secular-minded, pro-choice, and favor all-inclusive policies with regard to race.

In a sense, not much seperates young liberals from young conservatives on social issues. That is unquestionably a good thing.

The primary difference comes with Federal spending. As a Libertarian I (and those in my circle) favor dramatic cuts in Federal spending (and taxation) coupled with dramatic increases in state spending (and taxation). In a perfect world, the amount spent on Federal and state income tax would be reversed from its current 3 to 1 Federal allocation.

Regardless, Americans must be patient and wait out the awful abyss that is Baby Boom leadership. The current ruling class (Baby Boomer's) have destroyed nearly everything they have touched. Government, industry, journalism, and even music and film.

I have hopes that Generation X, followed by Y, will learn from the selfishness and inept Baby Boomers that now rule things.

Go blow it out your ass, Gettysburg. "The awful abyss that is Baby Boom leadership." What an Analytical Genius you are! Oh, sorry, I meant Generational Thumbsucker!

"an insulated group of elites funds and runs our country, leading us astray into Iraq and simultaneously eroding the tax base that supports our troops and nation"

Maybe once you could make the identification rich = Republican or rich = militarist or rich = anti-tax. But no longer. For instance Soros, Bloomberg, Lamont, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, Thomas Friedman, Ted Turner, to mention a few household names. Or for that matter Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, they are indeed the "wealthiest Americans" but they don't seem to be using their money to "consolidate their grip on our political system."

I'm afraid I think this column is misguided.

Re: Until a citizen registers to vote without identifying a party, democracy will not truly exist. The two-party system will not be broken until all can register without being required to identify with one party or the other.

No one is required to claim party ID in order to vote. I have registered as a non-partisan voter since I was 18.

I have to agree that the Baby-Boom generation is on the whole one of the most destructive ones of the the 20th century and certainly the most selfish BAR NONE.

But to think that Generation X or Generation Y or the Millennials or whoever are paragons of virtue and change and newness is pretty blind.

"A steadfast implosion of our two-party system has vitriolic Democrats and Republicans going down swingin"

"I've have always maintained that I’m waiting for the revolution before running before political office."

Leigh maybe I am just filling dyspetic tonight but reading these two comments in tandem makes we ponder two different questions. One "why are you not vitriolic?" and "why should we wait for you to emerge from under the protection of the revolution?"

If you are not angry you are not paying attention, and haven't been say since about November 2000.

Lead, follow or get out of the way. Forgive me if "waiting for the revolution", however ironic you meant it, doesn't quite cut it. Can you sharpen your point here? I mean I would love to have coffee but I am not ready to rally under the banner of Leigh. I am willing to put myself on the cutting edge but "waiting for the revolution" is kind of like not running with scissors. The Revolutionary Vanguard left for the Finland Station awhile back. A little late for you to volunteer to lead the parade.

Regardless, Americans must be patient and wait out the awful abyss that is Baby Boom leadership. The current ruling class (Baby Boomer's) have destroyed nearly everything they have touched. Government, industry, journalism, and even music and film.
I have hopes that Generation X, followed by Y, will learn from the selfishness and inept Baby Boomers that now rule things.

I have to admit this may have a seed of truth in it. The baby boom has been a disaster in terms of leadership. It seems like they peaked as a generation during the 60s, and it has been downhill since then.

Why do I say this? Look at the 70s (ME decade), 80s(decade of greed) and the 90s (scandal and partisan driven). Boomers have played a driving role in all of this. And it has been regardless of party or ideological affiliation.

Have boomers ever followed the example of the WWII leadership and asked the country to sacrifice anything? Has there been a vision beyond identity politics (which the boomers pioneered, imho)?

I know this sounds a little harsh, but as a member of Gen X it just outrages me to know that in 10-15 years we will inherit a country that may be coming off the rails due to the selfishness and shortsightedness of the previous generation.

So, Gettysburg, taxes are your problem? Other than taxes you describe yourself as a San Francisco liberal. So, let's look at taxes.

It's not uncommon for each generation to have the mistaken idea that the world they live in just fell out of the sky since they were not around to see it getting built. Our generation did it too. But, consider how, with less taxes, your generation would build freeways, universities, harbors, longer life spans, etc. if the older generations just said, "hey, we built it, it's ours, go build your own".

Republican tax breaks went mostly to the upper tier of the pyramid (older folks), your generation was thrown a token tax cut. So, Republicans promising lower taxes instead gave you greater debt. I'll die before the Bush debt is paid off, but you, my young friend, will pay for that larceny all of your life. It pays to read the fine print on social contracts because the fallout lasts for a very long time and you can't just buy your way out of some things.

Your 3 to 1 shift of federal taxes to state taxes would mean that 1/2 of federal taxes would be going to debt payment. But I'm all for that!! Blue states pay a far greater share of federal taxes than red states. For example, Rhode Island gets back only $0.67 on every dollar of federal tax, while Oklahoma gets back a whopping $1.43 on every dollar of it's taxes. With your shift Oklahoma, and all red states, would have to start paying it's own way in the world, something that conservative thinking can not do. In 20 years time Oklahoma would become a third world economy while Rhode Island could have reduced it's taxes and moved on to the 22nd century. Girls are smarter than boys. Boys look for boobs, girls look for deeper pockets, so those red state girls will have migrated to blue states looking for husbands. Rhode Island will have to legalize polygamy so blue boys can have multiple wives (which they will be able to afford now that they are not sending money to Oklahoma) and Oklahoma will have to legalize gay marriage so all those boys left behind holding hands can move in together to cut expenses so they can pay their higher taxes. Long story short, Oklahoma gets depopulated, which to me is a very good thing.

I live it flaming red Idaho. We get back $1.26 on our tax dollar. Paying and collecting federal taxes the biggest scam, and the biggest single industry, in the state.

Watch out what you wish for, ideas have consequences, something you'll learn with age.

"I have hopes that Generation X, followed by Y, will learn from the selfishness and inept Baby Boomers that now rule things."

Well, you might try something really reactionary like say - voting.

I mean what has your generation done?

Older folks inevitably lose their idealism or get distracted by kids and mortgages. Your generation never seems to have ever had idealism at all.

Libertarian? Swell. But if that's not informed by something a little more future looking than "it's all mine, and it's all for me", I don't envy your children either.

That said, the Independent Party did cause the defeat of the Democratic candidate for Governor in MN and the Democratic Party better keep an eye open on its left too. It's not entitled to any voter.

Kache

I live in Los Angeles.

I have been vitriolic.  Had to shut off the radio/avoid the newspapers/enjoy the self-imposed silence for the final weekend prior to the election because I couldn't take the smug insistence of Bush that the Republicans would prevail through this election ("Shows you what I know," is how he amended his prior comments in his Sayonara Rumsfeld press conf. on Wed!).  I'm not sure where I indicated I wasn't vitriolic.  In fact, I believe my first link in this post is to another piece I wrote on Foresight on negative campaigning and the compromise of civil rights for certain Americans.  I think my disgust with what we saw during this campaign season was apparent.

On the other hand, I love your response to my "waiting for the revolution" comment.  Totally appropriate given the remark, but truthfully that statement was no more than a deliberately pithy, attention-seeking opener for my TPMCafe debut.  Rest assured, I consider myself very much a part of a movement that seeks to change the face and balance of politics in our country and worldwide.  Hence my presence here - though blogging is scarcely the only means for pursuing change!

Well, I voted for prop 2 in MA.

NYCWeboy is one of the smartest political commentators I know, so I take all his points seriously. Nonetheless, I stand by my points that the rising rates of Independent registrants on "both" sides of issues (sticking with my example of immigration) and in our diversifying country is something to watch.

What I'm interpreting from the range of comments is that perhaps what I'm seeing is less the rise of an autonomous third party than the evolution or extinction of one of our current two into something new. Certainly, this seems to be the struggle of the progressives these days, though I concur with NYCWeboy that it's happening at best in fits and starts, and clearly under the aegis of the Dems umbrella. To that end, I like the point of a commentator below that the Dems are the umbrella for such a party evolution and ideal widening into a multi-party system.

A worthwhile point that NYCWeboy and others collectively make is the lack of a "serious philosophical alternative" to the existing parties. I think that's a critical step for researchers, pollsters, crack bloggers, etc. to undertake - to understand the preferences among those who are registering as Independents. Because whether it fades to black over time, or continues to be a ascendant trend in our political system, for now the data tells us that it is the fastest growing voter affiliation in a variety of states, ethnic groups, etc. And why that's the case is worth trying to understand at a deeper level.

Then act like it.

I agree, but the excuse to run him was that he is a "centrist". That works when you have a candidate like Klobuchar who can run as Mrs. Minnesota but Minnesotans have never been afraid to vote for a maverick with ideas. Centrists who are bad candidates don't win either.

One of the things I've found surprising reading through the collection of comments is the contentment with or acceptance of the 2-party system.  I can't refute commentators like this one who point out the very real difficulty of changing the actual structure of our government - technically, I stand corrected on envisioning a move to a parliamentary style of government in the U.S. (yes, this was the political fantasy underlying my post, with me at the helm, no less!)

But I am at odds with an underlying tone of some of these counter-arguments that this is somehow a satisfactory or robust system.  I find it fossilized, antiquated; my criticism is akin to the current trend in political theory that questions the legitimacy, use and efficacy of the nation-state in this era of globalization.  Underpinning any structural change like revising our party system is human agency - and the rise of Independent voters (not their actual numbers!  some of you should note) to me indicates we should be considering this trend as an act of resistance to an ill-fitting structure in a new global age.  While it may be considered a conservative, wont-play-nice-with-anyone maneuver, the trend across different political groups to me indicates it is the first step towards finding a better political fit within a system in serious flux.  

We are living through a period of profound, historical change: economically, demographically, and politically.  To quote the New School's Arjun Appadurai: "The speed and intensity with which both material and ideological elements now circulate across national boundaries have created a new order of uncertainty in social life."  (Fear of Small Numbers, p5)

Comparatively, we're neither a violent nor particularly radical country (Appadurai's point is about the violence accompanying globalization).  But we are an extremely diverse country, and we've engaged in our own version of political and cultural violence to respond to our own rising uncertainty (economically, culturally, etc.) like Appadurai describes.  While this might be most notable in flippant use of words like "macaca," generally our current Administration's xenophobic assault on immigrants, gays, and Muslims, among others, easily morphs into an overall disregard for the security and rights of the average American. 

Perhaps pointing out the rise of the Independent voter is a narrow or misguided means of illustrating the fundamental import of our changing demographics, which was my real fascination during this electoral season.  I stand by my point that something transformative is underway, even if we continue to vote Republican or Democrat for the remainder of our young lives (if the anti-Baby Boomer debate here is any indication of our average age!).  As a nation, like many around the world, we are questioning our identity, our legitimacy, and our sovereignty as our borders become more porous, the rest of the world tires of our dominance, and more and more interest groups assert their claims on the state.  Tired sexual and criminal undertones of attacks on black candidates like Harold Ford and Deval Patrick stood alongside victory for the first Muslim Congressman and the ascension of the first female Speaker of the House.  In the midst of this 21st century struggle for identity, voice and power, a significant number of voters are grappling with the means to participate in our political system.  And, maybe ironically, for some being an Independent offers them much more flexibility and political engagement than party affiliation.