Two parties not enough anymore?

Editorial by Burlington Times-News, April 4, 2016.

The battle for the Republican presidential nomination has been addressed a lot more than the Democratic race. That’s understandable given that the atmosphere on the GOP side has been roiled by an unconventional candidate doing what no one a year ago would’ve thought possible. An endless run of debates and associated controversies only stoked the media flames.

In fact, many in the media and on the right and left have basically declared the Democratic race over, saying Hillary Clinton would prevail against the insurgent candidacy of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. And they’re sticking to that assessment even after Sanders defeated Clinton most recently in caucuses in Alaska, Hawaii and Washington, and has won five of their last six primary or caucus confrontations.

Clinton leads Sanders in pledged delegates, 1,243 to 975; toss in Democratic superdelegates who aren’t bound by primaries and caucuses, and at this point favor her overwhelmingly, and her edge grows to 1,712 to 1,004; and the Democratic Party establishment is in her corner.

Math comes before momentum in the dictionary, and the numbers favor Clinton. Sanders is trying to swing superdelegates his way, and some might have their heads turned by his recent success, but Clinton has more experience at playing this game.

However, while everyone focuses on the GOP, there are plenty of potential fault lines on the Democratic side.

A recent USA Today/Rock the Vote poll found Sanders has a 17-point lead, 54 to 37 percent, over Clinton among millennial voters (ages 18 to 34). His lead grows to 31 points, 61 to 30 percent, among millennial women.

Millennials and activists of the left are solidly behind Sanders’ message, as liberal a platform as has been presented by a major party candidate in a couple of generations. He does, after all, describe himself as a socialist. They view Clinton — a woman scorned since 1992 as basically a Republican.

They’ve helped fill Sanders’ nearly $140 million campaign war chest, mostly with small donations. They’re also solidly committed to Sanders the person.

Twenty percent of the millennials polled by USA Today said they would sit out the general election in November if Sanders isn’t the nominee, even if it’s Clinton vs. Donald Trump.

The thing is, 17 percent of Republicans recently polled by CNN said they would never vote for Trump if he’s their party’s nominee.

So, we could have another abysmal presidential election turnout (it was just 57.5 percent in 2012), this time because of a massive, bipartisan sulk.

Odds are though that GOP voters might be more inclined to give two cheers, pinch their nostrils and vote for somebody they’re really not enthusiastic about rather than a Democrat.

The 18-34 crowd helped elect Barack Obama twice, but polls show they’ve fallen out with him because — and Republicans better sit down — he hasn’t been sufficiently liberal. That cauldron would’ve been there for Sanders to stir even without Clinton around.

Who shows up and who stays home might actually determine more than a president. Is it possible that the two-party system has outlived its usefulness and can no longer adequately reflect the political philosophies present in the U.S.?

A version of this editorial first appeared in the Gadsden Times, a Halifax Media Group newspaper.