Editor's Notes: Our Headless Opposition Party System

Despite the rage directed at Donald Trump and his personality cult party, the approval rating of the Democratic Party remains quite low. There are many reasons for this, and it's a global trend to have just a general disenchantment with one's established parties and institutional leaders, to be sure. But on the side of likely Democratic voters, much of it comes down to the sense that the Democrats are not doing enough, that they lack direction, that they're not an effective enough opposition.

There's a great deal of legitimate criticism to be made about Democrats' overall performance since the beginning of the second Trump term, as well as for key figures such as Schumer or Jeffries.

But I want to suggest one of the basic problems is structural. American parties simply do not have leaders. The closest we ever get are presidents, but what this means is that the president's opposition is essentially never united around a leader except for after the opposition party's primary the year of a presidential election.

This is not unique to America but a feature of presidential systems in general. In a moment like this, it can be a real impediment to mobilizing a broad opposition. But, grudgingly as one who prefers the parliamentary model, I do think it also has its strengths. Both are worth considering.