Outrage Overload: Rethinking politics, division, and media
ExplorePodcast overview and latest content
EpisodesBrowse the full episode archive

Podcast

  • Explore
  • Episodes

Recent Episodes

  • 90. Can You Build a Political Tribe Out of the Moderates Left Behind? – Paul Chapman
  • DOCUMENTARY - When the State Loses Moral Legitimacy
  • 89. The Mentalization Gap - Lura Forcum
  • 88. The Cost of Purity and the Power of Pluralism – Allison K. Ralph
  • BONUS - Navigating the Outrage Industry with Corey Nathan

Links

  • Apple Podcasts
  • Overcast

About

Outrage Overload: Rethinking politics, division, and media

Outrage Overload: Rethinking politics, division, and media

Powered byPodRewind
    Outrage Overload: Rethinking politics, division, and media
    Ep. 90•June 17, 2026•31 min

    90. Can You Build a Political Tribe Out of the Moderates Left Behind? – Paul Chapman

    The U.S. House of Representatives used to pass roughly 900 bills per session in the 1950s. Today, that number has plummeted to just 50 or 60. Our legislative branch isn’t just slow—it is structurally paralyzed. In this episode, we look past the cultural shouting match to expose the structural design flaws fueling our polarization. From sweetheart gerrymandering that leaves 80% of congressional districts completely non-competitive, to the financial incentives driving both major parties to abandon the center, we look at the reality of the "exhausted majority." To discuss a radical attempt to fill this vacuum, we sit down with political scientist Paul Chapman. He is the founder of the CenterCratic Party, a brand-new third-party movement trying to do something entirely unique: build a political tribe out of the 45% of Americans who now identify as politically homeless. We push into the hard mechanics of his strategy, the realities of voter tribalism, and the party’s nine guiding principles of governance. Text me your feedback and leave your contact info if you'd like a reply (this is a one-way text). Thanks, David Support the show Show Notes: https://outrageoverload.net/ Contact me, David Beckemeyer by email outrageoverload@gmail.com. Follow the show on Instagram @OutrageOverload. We are also on Facebook /OutrageOverload. Check out our Subtstack https://outrageoverload.substack.com HOTLINE: 925-552-7885 Got a Question, comment or just thoughts you'd like to share? Call the O2 hotline and leave a message and you could be featured in an upcoming episode If you would like to help the show, you can contribute here. Tell everyone you know about the show. That’s the best way to support it. Rate and Review the show on Podchaser: https://www.podchaser.com/OutrageOverload Also check out our companion podcasts, This Week in Outrage and Outrage Science Bites. Intro music and outro music by Michael Ramir C. Many thanks to my co-editor and co-director, Austin Chen. Outrage Overload, a Conners Institute podcast, is part of The Democr...

    Apple PodcastsOvercast

    Transcript

    0:00

    We all know the outrage industry likes to keep us angry and divided. But to fix a broken system, we have to understand the people inside it. I'm asking our community to take a quick two minute quiz from Harmony Labs to find your audience. Wedge. Are you a builder, a referee, an investigator, or one of the other archetypes? Head to outrage overload.net quiz right now. Take the quiz and log your archetype in our anonymous poll. We'll use the results to tailor our upcoming episodes, deep dives and interviews to help us change the channel from outrage to insight.

    0:40

    This podcast is part of the Democracy Group.

    0:49

    Welcome to Outrage Overload, a science podcast about outrage and lowering the temperature. This is episode 90.

    1:00

    It's making us all incredibly worried about our form of government and about democracy is that there's no principles anymore. We all thought we had principles on how we govern, but those principles have pretty much gone away.

    1:22

    We talk a lot on this show about the incentives that drive our polarization. How the media ecosystem feeds on anger to keep you clicking, watching and voting out of fear. But the dysfunction isn't just cultural, it's structural. Right now, based on Sweetheart Gerrymandering, roughly 80% of congressional districts are completely non competitive. The election is already decided in nearly 400 districts before a single ballot is even cast. This November. With no competition, both major parties have abandoned the center to cater to their fringes. Fueled by accelerated PAC funding, they've left behind the moderates. They've left behind the exhausted majority. But what if the massive group of Americans who feel politically homeless actually represents the biggest political opportunity of our lifetime? And that's what we're going to talk about on this episode of the Outrage Overload podcast. I'm your host, David Beckmeier and and today's guest is a political scientist who looked at the vacuum and decided to stop analyzing the problem and start building a solution. He is launching a brand new third political party. One built not on rigid, polarizing ideology, but on nine core governing principles focused on compromise, accountability and facts.

    2:35

    Hi, I'm Paul Chapman and I am the founder of the Democratic Party. I live right here in San Mateo, California and I'm a political scientist, I'm a technologist, I'm an entrepreneur, and I'm a management consultant.

    2:56

    Now, we've all seen third party movements flame out under the weight of structural barriers, tribal voting habits and debate exclusions. But Paul isn't naive about the math. He's a structural expert, like looking at strategic write in campaigns in 41 states and targeting the moderate contributors who are completely disgusted with the fringes. He's aiming straight for the voters who want to bring dignity and fiscal discipline back to governance. Can independent or centrist become a powerful new political tribe? Or will the gravity of the two party duopoly be too strong? We press into the hard strategy, the nine guiding principles and, and the reality of fighting political tribalism next. Stick around.

    3:39

    Paul Chapman, welcome to the program and thank you so much for making time for us.

    3:43

    Thank you so much, David. It's a pleasure being here.

    3:48

    Yeah, glad to have you. I always like this topic. You know, we, this comes up all the time. You know, people talking about the idea of our two party system is rigged or broken in some way. And you know, a lot of people have different ideas for what we can do about it. So start off by telling us a little bit more about the party that you're starting and how you got there. And you know what, how you came to this conclusion that a third party was the answer.

    4:14

    Be glad to. You know, it's interesting because as a political scientist, I just love studying American politics in particular. And in fact, my degrees are all in political science and no intention whatsoever to ever start a third party. But as I was studying what was happening here with the dysfunctionality of our two political parties, what I discovered were a number of facts. One is that our Congress, this is our House of Representatives, has been in a very slow decline in terms of performance over the last 70 years. You see, back in the 1950s, late 1950s, they were passing roughly about 900 bills in every single Congress congressional session. Today, it's roughly around 50 to 60. No kidding. You can see that steep decline. It's sort of like a ski slope all the way from the 1950s to right here, 2026. And that is really disturbing. Our Congress is just not performing. They're in a paralytic state. So that's one. And so when I saw that, it started to, to better understand what was happening here. And then what I realized is that there were a number of factors that were causing our government, and in particular the legislative branch, to be in a position where it really wasn't living up to America's expectations. And one of the biggest factors is the fact that most of our congressional districts today are not competitive. Virtually 80% of the congressional districts today have been what's called sweetheart gerrymander, in which this coming November elections, 399 of the congressional districts are already decided. I mean, it just, it's unbelievable. 36 are the only congressional districts that are really up for grabs could be off by a few here and there, but generally speaking, we don't have much in the way of any competition. And you and I both know, David, is that when you divide up like that, you are creating a polarizing environment. And that's what we're living with right now. And so then I started to look at what's causing this polarization and what I found is that starting back, oh, in the 1980s and just accelerating since 2010 due to a Supreme Court decision, there's more and more of funding from the political action committees going to the congressional candidates, going to the elections, such that we're ending up with a significant number of our congressional candidates and our House members that are focused more on the fringes. This is where and how we got to maga, which is the fringe factor. This is how we got to the progressives on the Democratic side. And those polarized areas are such that both the Democrats on the left and Republicans on the right have abandoned the center of America, the moderates. How do we know that? Gallup just released a survey that showed 45% of Americans that don't align with either the Republicans or the Democrats. 45%. That is an all time high. That means, in fact that we're almost at half of the electorate that doesn't see themselves aligned with either one of the parties. They're alone. They have no political party. And interesting enough, in that same survey, only 20% align with the Democrats and only 20% align with the Republicans. So if you've got 45% that don't have a home, this is an opportunity of a lifetime for a third party to come on in. And that is why I made a conscious decision to start the third party and ultimately bring the Democratic Party to life.

    9:42

    Yeah, that's great. So all of those things are true, you know, but that doesn't remove the barriers that make it more challenging. And I think, you know, and I, and I think there's a whole nother piece of it here that about the, this, the assumption that the 45% that didn't align with other parties are, you know, want a more centrist position, there's a lot of different directions we can go. The one I want to really start with is, is, is maybe that one. We've got the 45% of people that are refusing to, you know, associate with the parties. That's true, but sort of Everybody wants that 45%. Right? I mean, there's lots of people working, you know, always the independent vote is like what swings These elections all the time. Right. And, and, and among that 45%, we should also note that many of them

    10:26

    aren't that independent in their voting.

    10:28

    Like they usually vote one way or the other, but they just don't want the label. And which means, again, they're not fully aligned with that party. But, but I think the assumption that that 45% is sent would. Is all centrist, I think, is.

    10:41

    Is not.

    10:41

    I don't think there's data to back that up.

    10:43

    Yeah. Okay, let me give you my perspective on this. And by the way, you're spot on. David. Do you realize. I think you do. When you and I look at the Republicans today, it's not the Republicans that you and I know as we grew up. And the same thing with the Democrats, it's not the same Democratic Party. When you study the Democrats and the Republicans going back 50, 60, 70 years, they were coalitions that had both liberal and conservative groups within them. That's not the case anymore. Those coalitions are gone. And both parties have become more purist in their thinking. And those that align with both, either the Republicans or the Democrats, are also aligned with that purist. That is exactly why you're seeing the 45% percent, because that group in the middle, and that's me, I think it's you. We're like, okay, we're not purists. Depends on the issue. So one of the things that's very interesting about the Syntocratic party is not from an ideological standpoint. I'm not going there from an ideological standpoint because as you point it out, you don't think, come on, you know, we already, you know, we're going to make a decision on it. It's more around the governing principles. What we stand for and what I have put into place as part of the Center Credit Party with my team are nine guiding principles that form the foundation of this political party. The first one is safeguard our democratic system. Govern through compromise, not domination. Number two, limit terms for accountability. Impose term limits on public office to prevent entrenchment and ensure representatives remain accountable to voters on that. Number three, protect election integrity. Guarantee transparent, fair and nonpartisan elections. Uphold certified results and let voters decide outcomes through lawful processes. Number four, one law for all. The law applies equally to all independent courts. Ensure fair process and protect basic rights. Those four are all under the category of Democratic foundation. The next two fall into the category of collaborative governance. And that's number five, debate with facts and dignity. Number six, seek unity through broad support. Build policies that earn broad, lasting Support. And then finally, the last category is principled leadership. And number seven is govern with a balanced approach. Reject both government overreach and government absence. Provide essential services, measure results, end what fails, and enforce fiscal discipline. Number eight, defend our freedom. Unite with allies to deter aggression and defend free nations against military, cyber and economic threats. And the number nine, exemplify global leadership. Demonstrate American and democratic values through dignified, restrained and humane leadership at home and abroad. That is what defines the Center Cratic party. And I can tell you, and you know this, David, you go out to the Republican Party website, you go out to the Democratic Party website, you will not find anything like that with either of the two political parties. All you will find are the 2024 platforms. And if you read those platforms, you will, you just, you will see that they're that, that that's how they govern. And that is not really defining the United States of America the way you and I feel. This, this country should be governed.

    15:23

    Awesome. Yeah. So I want, I definitely want to cover the challenges about third parties. There's some structural difficulties to make it happen. You even talk about PACs and how that's a stumbling block there. How are you going to compete on the money side? So how do you think? Where does this start? Like, what's step one? And why will this be more successful than other attempts? I mean, I can say most recently, probably the Libertarian Party has probably had the most success as a third party. Maybe I'm not sure I'm right about that, but. But it's up there, you know, but again, they're still, they're sort of barely around now in terms of how they appear on ballots. So, so how is this going to be different and what, what's sort of step number one for this party now?

    16:05

    Yeah, let's start with the Libertarian Party because I think it is important that I, I note that this is far different than the Libertarian Party. Libertarian Party will always be around, but it's a niche party and it falls into the category of an ideological party. Now, with that said, you and I both know that every one of the states has significant barriers for a third party. But I love a challenge. I have been in the technology space my entire career, although my degrees are all in political science and I have a passion for political science. I also have a passion for problem solving, having the ability to start three businesses, work with companies, and solving major business and technology problems. I look at what we're confronted with here as a third party, and once you understand what the rules are and the rules are very clear, then you just look at how you're going to solve them. The other thing is that there's clear opportunities to bypass some of those restrictions. There are 41 states that allow write in candidates, write in votes. And so depending on the opportunity and depending on the election, that is a great option for the center cratic party in order for us to get in there and start making headway in terms of getting not only the right candidates, their, you know, in place in winning elections, but also gaining the momentum that we need. So that's just on the election front, on the fundraising.

    18:14

    Yeah.

    18:17

    Political action committees we have to, just like the Democrats and the Republicans, we have to go fundraiser and political action committees is going to, it is part of our overall strategy. There are a lot of folks on the left and a lot of folks on the right that contribute via PACs. But you and I also know there's a lot of folks in the middle that are disgusted with what they're seeing on the left and the right and are gladly willing to contribute to a centrist political party.

    19:01

    Yeah, I want to talk about something that's come up a couple times and that's kind of this idea of tribal, this sort of purity kind of idea. And, and you even said, you know, years ago people were sort of proud of being a Democrat or proud of being a Republican. But there's also, there was also a time when, you know, that was less salient in people's lives. Right. Than you know, and, and they even might even, you know, kind of vot, you know, do split tickets and things like that. And then the parties kind of realized that and they didn't really like it and they did sort of a active effort to distinguish themselves. You know, they started to want to see how they're, how show how they're different than the other party more than, you know, in those times when they were getting 900 bills passed in there. But if, but what they were concerned about is people would say, well, I don't know the difference between the Republicans, the Democrats. So they, they actually actively started to polarize basically on issues and, and on positions and you know, and of course they've realized, as you said, they're kind of a marketing organization, just like social media and everything. Everything else they've realized they can use this tribalism idea in their favor.

    20:04

    Right.

    20:04

    If you become sort of start wearing the blue flag or the red flag, you know, you're more susceptible to manipulation. Like we can touch on your, they're attacking your principles or whatever because you're blue or you're red. So you need to defend your, yourself. So go vote against this person. You know, and it's, it's of course much more about voting against things than it is about voting for things. And it, and it does have this. Ideology is not even really the right word, but it's like this tribal nature to it and that's. They know we've had a lot of people on this show and the science about these tribal tendencies of humans, they have, you know, learned that to take advantage of that. So if you don't have that sort of tribal nature to this and maybe you can, you can say the new tribal nature can be we're more independent and more centrist and more moderate. Maybe that's the new way that you can sort of have an identity to go with it. But I'm just curious how you feel about how much you've thought about that idea that people don't want to give up their tribe in some way even though they say they do. They're just often not even aware of their own tribal tendencies.

    21:07

    I'm an avid reader and I love reading op EDS in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post. I'm on X, you know, daily and all of that. It's just so funny. It is, it's funny to me because depending on the article, whatever you get. Yeah, the two tribes as you talked about. Okay, depending on who it is, you know what the article or whatever it is, you know, one group is slamming the other. But here's the thing, David, because we've been living in this two party world and there hasn't been a third party. Your question is really kind of open for grabs. I don't know because we have never really experienced a third party coming into the mix. And it's interesting if you were to see my responses. And I love to be able to do this because I'm right there. And don't get me wrong, I'm not like one of these goody two shoes in the middle. I call both of the parties out in my messages and when it's called for, they hear it from me. But your point is, is a, is a good one. We don't know because we haven't had that third party in the middle for people to say, well, maybe that's my tribe. Don't know, only time will tell.

    22:41

    Yeah, that's a good point. Yeah, I like it. So I wanted, you know, with the nine points, I wanted to. I was thinking about this right away, you know, again, since I See, you know, a lot of these counter positions and people taking different perspectives on these things. Like, you know, I think for a lot of it, it all sounds good. Like at the high level, these all sound like good things. But, you know, both parties would argue they're already doing this. Like our way is this right? And like we have that, you know, their version of, of, you know, election integrity. One version, one party says election integrity is, is this, it's, you know, the SAVE act. And it's basically a bunch of other things about, you know, voter ID and stuff like that. When someone else says election integrity is, you know, some of the institutions that we have and stuff like that, both think they're already doing this. So what I'm. What I guess my main point is each of these things appears like things that would have a lot of. They're going to mean different things to different people, you know, and I know that, like I say, almost everyone can agree with these at a high level, but as you start drilling down, you might find they have actually very polarized views on what policies support those principles.

    23:56

    Point well taken. But you know, so far as this has been, you know, presented to voters, to Americans, no one's come back and said this. I, I'm interpreting this different for a Democrat versus a Republican. And in fact, when these principles were put together, they were put together in sort of a neutral way. Here's the other really interesting thing. If you were to go out to the Center Cratic Party website, again, that's Center Cratic Party. What we do is we take these principles and they're primarily the Democratic foundation and collaborative governance principles that's around debate with facts, seek unity through broad support. And we take an issue might be immigration, it could be something dealing with education, whatever it might be. And we show what all three political parties where their stance is on a particular issue, and then we show where we are on that issue and how we apply these principles in order to build our policy up against them. But I would welcome to your point, if anyone, and including the political parties think that they are adhering to these nine principles, hey, let's see it. But you and I both know we're not seeing that now, and we certainly aren't seeing it on the Republican side. And we don't have enough time in today's podcast. But I can throw out scenarios with both political parties on virtually every one of these where they're not demonstrating these. They certainly are.

    25:55

    Well, I think the ones that, to me that stand out as the most sort of, you Know people and see what they want to see in it and interpret it their own way. Is number one, which was number one

    26:09

    is safeguard our democratic system governed through compromise, not domination.

    26:15

    Yeah, I do, I do love it. And the, another one that I would say is going to be subject to interpretation quite a bit. It would be the election. It was election integrity or another word that you use there.

    26:28

    Yeah. And that. Yeah. Was guaranteeing transparent, fair and nonpartisan elections, uphold certified results and let voters decide outcomes through lawful processes.

    26:39

    Yes. I think those would be two. That would be. I can see a lot of different people's, you know, I could see different kind of perspectives on those that could be quite in conflict.

    26:47

    Yeah. Because in fact, you and I are dealing with it right now because both of the two political parties have their own definitions of what election integrity is. Right. But then this also is where number six comes into play and that is seek unity through broad support. Build policies that are in broad lasting support, where consensus is out of reach, respective communities will find their own path. And then this is also where number one comes in. Govern through compromise, not domination.

    27:21

    Yeah. And you know, and I, I noticed, you know, I, I do worry a little bit about a lot of these things can be sort of coded language can seep in even if you don't even know it because there's so many, there's so many sort of trigger words for people these days, you know, and I don't know if you've had an opportunity to, you know, maybe run this by, you know, people that are close to that kind of thing on both

    27:42

    the left and right to sort of

    27:43

    look for coded language and then try to neutralize that language a little bit.

    27:48

    I haven't. But then again, I'm, I'm not trying to get, you know, MAGA sure. Folks to embrace this. And in fact, it's funny because when there's marketing, you know, that's really focused on, you know, the, the moderates, once in a while, either the progressives or the, the, the MAGA folks will chime in. And it's so, so interesting some of the comments that come in. We're not trying to persuade them. You even said it. You know, they already have their perspective and by the way, we respect, you know, what they stand for and we're not going to try to change them. And that's not important for us. It's really more around making sure the moderates, those in the center, feel that there's no hidden messages.

    28:46

    Well, and I will warn that even people in, you know, center left and center right can be, you know, sort of tuned into some of that coded language.

    28:54

    Yeah. Yeah, you're right. Yeah.

    28:56

    But yeah, I love it.

    28:57

    So.

    28:58

    So, yeah, so remind everybody again, how can people find out more and get involved?

    29:03

    Best ways to go out to our website, which is center cratic dot party. We also have a substack love for you guys to go out there and visit us. We're at center voter. All one word. Center voter.

    29:22

    Awesome.

    29:23

    Well, Paul Chapman, thank you so much again for making time for our show.

    29:27

    Well, thank you so much for inviting me, David. Really appreciate it.

    29:41

    That is it for this episode of the Outrage Overload podcast. For links to everything we talked about on this episode, go to outrage overload.net outrage overload is a Connors Institute podcast. The Connors Institute for Nonpartisan Research and Civic Engagement at Shippensburg University works to disseminate high quality nonpartisan information to the American public around issues of societal well being, democracy promotion, and news literacy. If you found this episode valuable, please share it or leave a review.

    30:09

    It really helps.

    30:10

    Thanks for listening and I'll catch you next time.

    30:20

    Ram.

    90. Can You Build a Political Tribe Out of the Moderates Left Behind? – Paul Chapman

    0:00
    0:00

    Related Episodes

    89. The Mentalization Gap - Lura Forcum

    89. The Mentalization Gap - Lura Forcum

    Jun 3, 202633 min
    Lura Forcummentalizationmentalization gap