For a moment, let’s imagine the 2016 election cycle as an American political clock. At 12 AM, Donald Trump has just joined the presidential race, but with all the mudslinging and insult-throwing, the election is beginning to resemble a strange episode of Desperate Housewives more than an intellectual hallmark of American politics. After a mere thirty minutes on our political clock, “The Donald” is widely projected to be the Republican nominee. Fifteen minutes later and some political analysts become so bold as to predict the extinction of the two-party political system due to increased polarization and inability to compromise. As you turn on the television for yet another episode of the American political rodeo, you can’t help but wonder in shock what happened in those forty-five minutes. After all, you say to yourself, you might not support Trump, but he’s still better than another four years with a Democrat. Welcome to the convoluted world of politics, where you’re stuck with a candidate you don’t like just because you hate the other side’s nominee even more. Due to the black-and-white mentality of politicians and establishment of closed-party elections, it is evident that political parties are polarizing American politics and corrupting fundamental democratic ideals, both politically and socially.

Voters elect their politicians to enact reforms and change. However, the political gridlock in Washington D.C. between Democrats and Republicans has only led to public feelings of abandonment and government inefficiency. In this mudslinging field of politics, both parties plot and scheme to gain complete governmental control, which hinders any sort of bipartisan agreement that could help the people. In the words of Robert Gebelhoff at the Washington Post, there’s only one law in the political wild west right now: “it’s my way or the highway.” With both parties adopting this “non-grey area” mentality of politics, the American government is being pulled apart from the inside, with the Democrats running the White House and the Republicans controlling Congress. In today’s complex society, many voters have developed mixed ideas and stances on political issues. A recent study published by Josh Clinton on MSNBC showed that most voters hated the other party more than they liked their own party. The animosity between parties has forced voters to choose one side or the other and the trash-talking between parties has only exacerbated this polarization. American politics is quickly becoming a choice of “the lesser of two evils.” On the surface, the radical separation between the two political parties seems to only manifest itself in the political gridlock in the capital but it is actually quickly infringing on a voter’s freedom of choice in an election.

Apparently, the Republicans are the problem. Wait, never mind, now the headlines say that the Democrats are to blame. Hold on, it’s back to the Republicans. Politics is an endless tug-of-war, and consequently, the American government is suspended in political stasis, thanks to the overt aggression between the two parties. The scorn of bipartisanship in Congress, like the dispute for the new Supreme Court justice, may be the most publicized example of this animosity but this hatred extends far lower than the Capitol. American citizens exhibit contempt for the members of the opposing party so much so that legislation was passed to introduce closed-party primaries, which are essentially elections to choose a presidential candidate with voting restricted to only registered party members. According to research gathered by John Scheb, in 1996, California voters attempted to overturn this law by passing Proposition 198 which converted all California primaries into open-party ones. However, in 2000, the Supreme Court’s ruling in California Democratic Party v. Jones forced California to maintain its closed-party primaries in order to ensure fair results. Late Justice Antonin Scalia believed that with open party primaries, each party would send its members to go vote for the candidate in the other party with the smallest chance of beating their own party’s candidate. California is not the only state to have such restrictions on primaries, which demonstrates the extent to which party animosity pervades American society. If political parties were not so radicalized, primaries could very well be open to voters of all affiliations but the blatant hostility between parties constrains voters to choosing candidates from their own party. Thus, voters cannot necessarily choose the candidate that best represents their own beliefs. With the Supreme Court ruling, the voters no longer have the freedom of choice and political power characteristic of a true democracy. Radicalization of political parties has forced closed-party primaries which are only one result of the polarization of American politics and unfortunately, the consequences extend past the political realm.

In the first fight between political parties, a rather unfortunate precedent started by the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, James Madison published Federalist No. 10, a pamphlet that asserted that political parties allowed for greater representation of all ideologies of Americans. Over two hundred years later, according to the National Democratic Institute, political parties still supposedly “offer citizens meaningful choices in governance, avenues for political participation, and opportunities to shape their country’s future.” Critics contend that political parties give citizens the confidence to voice their opinions and allow them to find political allies to support their causes. Unfortunately, political parties only work in theory. In reality, political parties are merely political consortiums that work to advance their own policies and dominate the government. They do not offer equal representation or participation. In fact, research conducted by the Pew Research Institute showed that the most radical politicians, such as Trump, are the most energetic and publicized. Additionally, because of this media advantage, the most radicalized views on the political spectrum are the ones heard most by the public, leading everyday Americans to believe that American politics have no moderate middle ground. A disproportionate amount of media attention is distributed between the different viewpoints, which, unfortunately, skews the political landscape and causes widespread voter ignorance. Furthermore in an article published by Forbes, proponents contest that political parties promote good competition between ideologies and advance American politics to support more demographics of citizens. But what substantial evidence is there to support that political parties advance each other? Political debates, or perhaps more appropriately, political debacles, do not yield interesting or constructive arguments. In fact, the American people are beginning to dislike associating themselves with others of differing political stances. Research published by the Pew Research Institute revealed that people now desire friends who think the same way as they do as “about six-in-ten (63%) consistent conservatives and 49% of consistent liberals say most of their close friends share their political views.” The fact is that the lack of a grey area mentality, so common among politicians, has now infiltrated all the rungs of American society.

Political parties may be said to represent all ideologies of American citizens, but in reality they are just forcefully consolidating political views into two radically different parties. The polarization of American politics appears in the election process as well as everyday civilian life. We need to face the facts. We can’t “make America great again” unless the differences between political parties are finally resolved and the American people are finally represented. We should not completely uproot the political system but we do need to reform and calm the storm of hatred between parties. In terms of the American political clock, it’s about 2 AM now--and it’s time to break up this party.