Party division is at its peak, but the extremes have never been closer to each other

On the surface, Democrats and Republicans are further apart today than perhaps at any point in American history. According to Pew Research , 80 percent of Americans believe that Republican and Democratic voters “cannot agree on plans, policies, or basic facts.”

In a deeper sense however, the growing political divide obscures something more consequential: the loudest voices on the far left and far right increasingly sound alike. Originally dubbed the “ Horseshoe theory ,” the concept argues that at the extremes, the political left and right eventually bend towards each other.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal , Greg Ip named this coalition the “Horseshoe Party.” As he sees it, leading this hypothetical party are Vice President JD Vance on the populist right and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on the socialist left. The two agree on almost nothing, except for a deep suspicion of free markets, elites and the idea that government should stay out of markets.

Unfortunately, the convergence extends well beyond Ip’s theoretical party.

President Trump has directed the government to take stakes in private companies, a position traditionally anathema to Republicans. Last year, Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) joined to co-sponsor a bill aimed at capping credit card interest rates — a policy originating with Trump. The House’s companion bill was introduced by Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), who authored a children’s book suggesting former President Biden stole the 2020 election and refers to herself as a “pro-life extremist.”

Likewise, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) have teamed up to raise taxes on high earners. And this month, Sanders and Steve Bannon co-headlined a conference calling for limits on artificial intelligence.

This convergence isn’t limited to politicians. Tucker Carlson — long one of the most influential conservative voices — has backed Democrat Abdul El-Sayed for Senate in Michigan over the Trump-backed Republican.

Yet perhaps nowhere is this convergence more prevalent than on foreign policy, particularly Israel. The Iran war may have fractured the MAGA base — Carlson has said Trump should be removed from office — but on Israel, one would find it impossible to discern whether a criticism was voiced by Carlson, Candace Owens, former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-Ga.), or Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich), Ocasio-Cortez, Ro Khanna (D-Calif) or extreme left-wing commentator Hasan Piker.

These camps are not united in pursuit of an overarching political direction — they agree on what they are against far more than what they are for. Instead, they’re tied together by anger towards common enemies: elites, foreign countries and big corporations which they feel have rigged the system. Trump’s own rise is both a symptom and a result of this sentiment.

As one well-known policy analyst wrote , “Trump has re-educated, or mis-educated a lot of Republican voters into thinking everything is rigged. It’s how Bernie Sanders thinks about the economy.”

Both parties’ establishments bear some responsibility. The bipartisan center presided over a period of globalization that devastated American communities, wars that cost tremendous blood and treasure and an economy whose gains too often failed to reach working families. It was also too slow to change course when voters demanded it.

Acknowledging these failures does not make the Horseshoe Party’s policies any less dangerous. Capping interest rates would choke off credit working families depend on. Abandoning Israel would not make America richer or safer. And stopping AI development, rather than regulating it responsibly, would cede leadership of this critical technology to China.

To be sure, political realignments do periodically occur, and neither extreme currently commands a majority. Pew’s Political typology finds that the most progressive bloc makes up just 7 percent of the electorate, while its counterpart on the right ranges between 9 and 12 percent.

However, as both parties increasingly abandon the center, candidates run to their most vocal, most extreme, base. As a result, candidates whose statements or policies would have been disqualifying a decade ago become nominees, taking these views into the mainstream.

That brings us to 2028. The energy is at the poles, but the votes that decide presidential elections remain in the center, for now. Whoever captures that with genuine solutions to the legitimate grievances that first pushed Americans to the extremes should have the votes when it matters.

Put another way, a candidate who promises restraint abroad without retreat or abandoning allies or offers a solution to the affordability crisis without price controls or government-run grocery stores will be stronger than simply the most populist one.

Right now, however, neither party has that candidate. Vance bet his future on being heir to Trump’s populism and expanding it. For Democrats, former Vice President Kamala Harris and California Gov. Gavin Newsom attempt to present as pragmatic but often concede the debate to the progressive wing.

Ultimately, the extremes converged because the old center failed. American jobs were shipped overseas, national debt ballooned and paychecks seemingly buy less every month.

If moderate Democrats or Republicans fail to reclaim the center by offering credible solutions — without the establishment’s complacency or the populists’ rage — voters will continue being pulled to the extremes, and our country will be significantly worse off.

Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book “ America: Unite or Die. ”