"I'm voting independent and the Newark Star Ledger agrees with me. 100
years of a two party system has been a disaster. Neither party is worth a shot."

.............

I am not sure about 100 years in this context, but what I see is
rutinization of auiomatic split.

It was so sweet when Bushland devided the Congress along the imaginary
near normal distribution curve ( that is not true) which have shown that the mioddle is now
CENTRIST ( using British terminology).

WE AUTOMATICALY CREATE INVERSE CURVE OF VIOTERS DISTRIBUTION GIVING
MOPRE TO THE EXTREMES AND NORT TO THE NEXT TO CENTER; AND THAN..... WE
NOT JUST WINING CANDIDATE FORGET ABOUT IT AS EXTREMIZM WAS NOT RAL;ITY
IN THE FIRST OPLACE ( PLUS OTHER REASONS).

That is and will nopt be true as we ca not think that way after all
that what went on and rutinized;
in American terms CENTRIST IS ONLY INDEPENDEDNT AND NOT ANY LASTING
POSITION YET
( till the moderate stancfe will not be attacked by the telvision adds
and disconfort the long term polarizers.
without such polarization no candidat prevails; well even with
employment of teh extremism
on issue candidats deadlock and end up the Court ( even Barack alost
ended up there
when me matched head to head wirth McCain). That is not that healthy
not be able to dioferentiate
which candidate matches the country needs better. That only means taht
the "test" we have is
not a giood test ( no test that all answer 50:50 or the worse 95:05 is
a good test)

It is not just candidates that polarize - we are very uncomfotable
when things are quiet and even out;
there was maybe one campain without  invectives that was run on the
meritorical issue alone. and..
no  more.

So how?

WHO IS THAT AMERTICAN CENTRIST?