The Parties Are Rigging the System; and the Results Speak for Themselves

Look at what happened in New York and Colorado and tell me the system is working.

In New York’s 10th Congressional District, a two-term incumbent was ousted by a democratic socialist backed by New York City’s self-described socialist mayor. In the 13th, a five-term congressman who chairs the Congressional Hispanic Caucus was defeated by a 32-year-old community organizer whose defining credential is organizing protests at Columbia University. In Colorado’s 1st Congressional District, a 15-term incumbent was defeated by a 29-year-old democratic socialist and activist.

Across the country, a new wave of far-left candidates swept aside establishment Democrats that included members backed by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who campaigned against them and lost anyway.

On the Republican side, it’s the same story with a different flag. MAGA-backed candidates continue to crush mainstream Republicans. Members of both parties are being pulled harder toward their respective bases by the day. The center is not holding mainly because the system isn’t designed to hold it.

This is not a coincidence. This is cause and effect. And until we’re honest about the cause, we’ll keep living with the effects.

The cause is a political system that both parties have spent decades engineering to serve themselves rather than the voters. The tools are different depending on where you look: closed primaries that shut out independent voters, gerrymandered maps that predetermine general elections, ballot access laws designed to exhaust and disqualify challengers before they ever reach voters. But the goal is always to ensure that the parties, not the people, decide who governs.

The primary system is where this rigging does its most corrosive work. Research conducted by Unite America found that in 2024, 87% of congressional races were effectively decided before a single general election vote was cast. Only about 7% of eligible voters participated in those primaries. That means a tiny, highly ideological slice of the electorate is choosing the vast majority of the U.S. House of Representatives.

When the general election doesn’t matter, candidates stop running for it. They run for the primary. And in a closed, low-turnout primary, the path to victory runs hard left or hard right. Centrists, problem-solvers, and bridge-builders don’t win these races. The partisan fringe does. The parties have constructed a system that rewards ideological loyalty over competence and elevates the most extreme voices in every room and they have the audacity to act surprised when Congress can’t function.

Recent election results are what the machine looks like when it runs exactly as designed.

There’s another consequence, too. When voters feel like their general election vote has already been decided for them, many stop showing up at all. This feedback loop of closed primaries, rigged maps, and declining participation hands our elections increasingly to the most motivated partisans. Which is precisely who shows up when everyone else stays home.

The result is a governing class that looks nothing like the country it’s supposed to represent.

And the country is noticing.

According to Gallup, 45% of the American electorate now identifies as independent. That is not a fringe. That is a plurality. It is the largest political bloc in the United States, and it is growing. These aren’t disengaged cynics. They are people who have looked at both parties and concluded, correctly, that neither speaks for them.

And they know what they want. Our own polling at The Independent Center in the fall found that 75% of American adults view a candidate favorably who works across the aisle with both parties. Three in four Americans. That is not a niche position. That’s a mandate. There is a massive, underserved demand in this country for common-sense leadership and debate-driven compromise. The two-party system has simply made it nearly impossible to supply.

Until now.

Because the parties have so thoroughly captured the machinery of elections, something unexpected is emerging in the space between them: for the first time in a generation, principled independent candidates are running with genuine paths to victory. In Iowa’s 1st District, Michael Bridgford is making his case to voters tired of being sorted into a partisan box. In California’s 6th, Kevin Kiley is offering an alternative to the left-right machine. In Alaska’s at-large seat, Bill Hill is running on the premise that Alaskans deserve a representative, not a party operative. In the Senate, Seth Bodnar is bringing his background as a military officer and university president to a Montana race, and Todd Achilles is challenging Idaho’s partisan status quo.

These candidates are not protest votes. They are serious people running serious campaigns in an environment that, finally, may be ready for them.

The timing carries its own irony. As we approach America’s 250th anniversary, it’s worth remembering that the founders feared partisanship above almost all else. George Washington devoted much of his Farewell Address to warning that political factions would become engines of self-interest. This would ultimately distort elections, undermine institutions, and put party above country. He was right, and we have spent 250 years proving him right.

But Americans don’t just accept things that aren’t working. They fix them.

Yesterday’s primaries showed us the machine running at full speed: partisans defeating centrists who refuse to simply fall in line, the party faithful rewarding loyalty over competence. But the independent movement is rising to the challenge in response to this broken system.

This is the democratic correction our country needs.

The founders warned us about parties. The voters are finally listening.

(*) Adam Brandon is a political bridge builder passionate about working with anyone who shares a common belief in America and its future. As Senior Advisor at the Independent Center, he invites Independent voters to voice their policy vision and join a movement for social change.