For those of us who are disappointed in the unfolding of the 2016 election campaigns, there is one small glimmer of hope. The Minnesota primary election of March 18, 1952, was historically memorable. Minnesotans flocked to the polls to cast 108,692 write-in votes for Dwight Eisenhower for president. That huge unexpected write-in vote captured national attention and served as a significant boost to Eisenhower in gaining the Republican endorsement in 1952 over such party stalwarts as Robert Taft, Earl Warren and Harold Stassen.

I wonder if we could do that again.

Most of the people I meet are less than fully enamored of the current front-runners in either major party. There appears to be widespread distrust of single-issue and class-oriented voters totally intolerant of achieving practical consensus in solving the pressing problems we have before us. There also appears to be widespread distrust of entrenched political power groups and special interests in backing candidates that many of us seem not to prefer.

Many of today's candidates are uninspiring, unimaginative and often malicious. They have a few poorly-thought-out proposals, but no practical sense of how to make the country better though science, organization, discipline and thoughtful consensus. It's a my-way-or-the-highway attitude, with most of the highways leading to nowhere.

Today's toxic and unproductive political atmosphere contrasts sharply with the more exuberant tone of the early 20th century. During that century's first three decades, the U.S. built schools and universities, became the world's strongest industrial complex, developed a sound energy industry, gave birth to aviation, built the Panama Canal, permitted votes for women, established the Federal Reserve System, adopted needed labor and safety laws, and welcomed 18 million immigrants into this country.

What major ideas are being proposed today? What progress is envisioned? A few ideas in distant circles seem far more interested in protecting the turf of special intransigent interests than in solving the deep problems we have in finance, industrial capability, job creation or program efficiency.

Maybe, once again, write-in votes could prove to be meaningful. None of the candidates leading in the polls — in either major party — seems to have the attributes of trustworthiness, empathy, prudence, justice and appreciation of the executive job that so many of us would like to see in a president. But our country does have some good people in both parties. Maybe Joe Biden or maybe Paul Ryan or maybe somebody else would be perceived as preferable over existing front-runners. What would happen if there were massive write-in votes for people whom we feel could meaningfully fulfill the requirements we are seeking for the most important job in the world?

Minnesota's primary election of 1952 proved significant. Maybe it could happen again. After all, it is our election.

Fred Zimmerman is a University of St. Thomas emeritus professor.