We find ourselves firmly planted in the second half of the 2016 presidential primary season, and two things are exceedingly obvious:

1) There is no such thing as a candidate, from either party, with a clear mandate of the voters.

2) The two party system is hopelessly divided into at least four dominant factions with no consensus seemingly within reach.

More than ever before, the United States of America seems firmly planted in the midst of an identity crisis. And also much more than ever before, this election season seems to be about anything other than the “safe bets” and “running towards the middle”.

Many people, rightfully so due to recent history, see this election cycle as a crisis. Our parties are not lining up rank and file behind an overwhelmingly popular or mandated candidate. We’re not moving through the primary process as quickly as possible to “focus on the general” earlier than the opposing team. Both parties are deeply rooted in an ideological struggle, and the end is seemingly nowhere in sight.

Instead of a crisis, this may be one of the most important moments in our modern American democracy. Why? Because, for the first time in many years, there is no such thing as a “safe” vote this year. The wild dynamics of the Trump campaign’s counterintuitively meteoric rise, plus the legitimate and formidable challenge to one of the greatest political organizations in American history are most certainly the proof in the pudding. Conventional wisdom has had very little success this season. Disapprovals are high, and untrustworthiness is rampant. And, pollsters have had an absolutely terrible time feeling confident about many of tea leaves in the polls this year. This inherently means that the American voter has never had a better time in their life to genuinely vote their conscience in spite of the usual safety net.

I believe all of these symptoms are a clear sign that our country is overdue for a reevaluation of who we are and what we really think. For a very long stretch of time in the relatively short history of our country, we’ve largely been told what our parties stand for, and how our ideologies should align within one of the two monolithic constructs that are these American Republican and Democratic parties. Time has passed. The world has evolved. Our electorate and the identity of our country are dramatically different than they were even ten years ago, much less thirty or forty, or even 240 years.

There have been multiple moments in time where our political parties stood up for great causes and have made dramatic, substantive impacts on the fabric of our nation, and each of those moments have largely defined where we stand today. From demanding political independence or resorting to isolationism, to abolishing slavery, and even setting up a “New Deal” with the American people, we’ve taken advantage of moments in time where we have the opportunity to reassess.

Now, more than ever recently, it’s our time to once again take a step back as an American people and redefine who we are and what we stand for.

There are two parties who are at an ideological divide right now, and for the next two months we have an opportunity to very loudly make a statement about what we want those two parties to look like. There is no “safe” bet this year because every shred of conventional wisdom has been thrown out the window. The outcome of us making this bold statement may dictate that we need one or maybe two additional major parties next election cycle. Or, it may reinforce that two parties fit our country well, but that our core beliefs and true ideologies have shifted dramatically. Or, we might just find out that the stereotypical moderate independent voter is increasingly indicative of the will of the general populace. Regardless: someone will end up losing this election, and the opposing group(s) of people will not be pleased with the result. But, if we’re true to ourselves and what we believe, this first step at identifying what we really look like as a country will help us to better align and fit the system to our identity in 2018, 2020, and beyond.

The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. Federalist No. 68

Over use of the word “man” aside — which is especially egregious in the context of this year: I hope we’re so bold as to make that definitive statement about who these people are who are “endowed with requisite qualifications” to meet our ideolgy in the remainder of this primary cycle. It’s time to ignore the traditional instinct of what is “safe” and instead vote for who you are and what you very deeply believe. Only then can we emerge from this process with a clearer identity of who we are collectively as a nation, and what will best serve us going forward. And, on the other side of it all, we’ll be just as “safe” as we would be if we didn’t genuinely and emphatically vote our conscience by taking the easy way out.

Publius