Well now, Sen. Kristin Sinema, you sure stirred up another storm in tempest-ridden Washington. But, in an attempt to make lemonade out of lemons, let’s give this most recent Declaration of Independence its due.

There seems to be renewed interest — again — in an independent, or third-party movement. Interest that almost never seems to get anywhere. But heck, if a three-class system for high school basketball can finally get its running legs in North Dakota after decades of crawling, perhaps some colorful thinking can boost the legitimacy of a third party.

Colorful, because in this day, a political organization needs an identity to give it immediate, recognizable impact. Like an athletic team needs a nickname and logo for fans to rally behind (UND hockey fans need not comment here), a third party will require something of the same.

The easiest way is to assign it color. For the last 40 years, red and blue have become synonymous with Republican and Democrat. So far, our third party is colorless.

So where to go on the political palette?

The most obvious would be white, to finish out our three-party national banner. But, nope, “Vote White” would be viewed as more than a tad racially insensitive. “Black Party” likely gets a similar response.

OK, then, my second favorite color has always been green. It’s pretty, it’s “grassroots,” it reminds us of the promise of springtime. And . . . it’s already taken by others wanting to save the planet from the reds and blues.

How about if we mix all the colors of the spectrum, and produce some super compromise of a hue, the perfect mixture for a third party that wants to take the best ideas from all comers: Mixing all the colors in light gives us an “additive” white. Blending a bunch of different colors of paint will produce a “subtractive” black. Oops, there we go again. By tweaking the mixture, you can, if you want, come up with a sort of ugly brownish-gray. But our new party does not want to remind voters of an 1880s wool suit.

If our third party’s top priority is to offend very few voters while getting a very unenthusiastic “eh” from everyone else, let’s pick beige! Who hates beige? Yeah, but who loves it? Similarly, mauve doesn’t pass muster either. By the way, neither does mustard.

Naw, it’s got to be a hue that most everybody likes, something that evokes a brightness, a hopefulness, yet doesn’t offend.

Got it. Orange! Who doesn’t like oranges or orange juice to start the day. They’re sweet, yet have that acidic bitterness to give the party substance and balance those sugary populist ideas. It smells and looks good and fresh, like you just found an independent Pete Buttigieg in your fridge.

However, there’s the problem of getting ING, Voya and the whole dammed Netherlands from releasing whatever trademarks they hold on the color. More importantly, today’s voting public demands absolute transparency, and the orange hides what it really is until ready to be eaten. Isn’t that the pits? Oh yeah, that too. They’re no seeds of democracy.

Maybe Sen. Sinema has some answers now that she’s dropping blue for . . . whatever. The esteemed or reviled senator from the desert has caused something a stir on Capitol Hill with her maverick fashion, various colored hair pieces, among them platinum blond, and the more bi-partisan lavender and pink.

In fact, her fashion features just about every color there is: animal prints, a hot pink sweater. She looks good and comes off as if she’s enjoying herself and believes in herself.

So, I don’t know what to suggest, third-partiers. Maybe don’t pick just one color, and definitely make sure the shades aren’t bland. Choose some vibrant tones that say “Here I am, consider ME.” Yeah, that might work.

Or, we could just thoroughly avoid the temptation to even talk about third parties as if they were potentially serious.

In fact, I’m dyeing to do just that.