We need a third or even fourth party to challenge the system.
The establishment will stop that of course.
That is when the people see this, we see France like protests.
I have a paradigm which would break the back of the party system, which by the way is not at all mentioned in the US constitution.
Unfortunately, "the Westminster System", based upon the UK system, embeds parties in the political system.
My solution is:
The Senate is meant to be a representation of "the States". The lower house is meant to be a representation of the people.
But, by voting for lower house representatives geographically (which made sense hundreds of years ago because lack of communication, but makes no sense now), the parties can "divide and conquer" any initiative the people have which does not comply with the wishes of the party elites.
Therefore, get rid of lower house districts. There are 435 House of Reps seats. There are approximately 213 million registered US voters; let's round that out to 217.5m for the sake of discussion. If someone wants a seat in the House of Reps, they just need to get 500,000 people to "vote" for them, from ANYWHERE in the country. People should be able to withdraw their support for a "representative" at any time. That would make them more responsive. And, you would get more diverse voices in CONgress rather than rigging it so that (except for rare examples) only those candidates blessed by the party hierarchy win.
This principle can be applied to any government which has a lower house intended to have representatives apportioned to the people. (e.g. US states, Australian federal govt, Australian state govts, UK parliament.)
As regards the 2016 "anomaly":
It was clear from the Republican Party's treatment of Ron Paul that the RP hierarchy is corrupt.
It was clear from the Democratic Party's treatment of Tulsi Gabbard that the DNC is corrupt.
You would think people would have learned by now that "The major parties stink like farties".
