Will Third Parties Run to Victory?

America's third parties tend to be regarded by political insiders as something of a joke. No candidate from the Libertarian or Green parties has won a high-profile state or national election — or even come close. That significant failure aside, representatives from these third parties insist that they are poised to make an impact this November. In fact, this time around they might have a few candidates with enough money and support to make things interesting. Establishment politicians who recall the contentious outcome of the 2000 presidential election and the bizarre shift in Senate power last spring regard this possibility as no laughing matter.

Just ask former vice president Al Gore. Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader shaved a critical margin away from Gore — most notably in Florida, where Nader grabbed more than 97,000 votes, most of which probably would have gone to Gore in an election decided by approximately 500 votes. In a less-publicized political fracas, the Libertarian Party (LP) played a critical role in tossing control of the Senate to Democrats and now Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.). The Senate was evenly divided (and ripe for Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont to defect from the GOP) at least in part because in 2000 incumbent senator Slade Gorton (R-Wash.) lost to Democrat Maria Cantwell by fewer than 3,000 votes. In that race, the LP candidate received more than 64,000 votes, most of which probably would have gone to Gorton. A similar fate had befallen Republican challenger John Ensign in his 1998 bid to unseat incumbent Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.). In March 2001, National Review referred to "The GOP's Libertarian Problem" as "what may be the most underreported political phenomenon of the last two election cycles."

The Greens and the Libertarians still itch for the role of spoiler. One of the most interesting races this year will be in Georgia, where redistricting has paired two incumbent Republicans — conservative Reps. John Linder and Bob Barr — in the GOP primary. Ron Crickenberger, political director of the LP, tells Insight that the party plans to spend as much as $100,000 in the race to attack Barr's hard-line position against medical marijuana and give the primary to Linder. An LP position paper entitled "Spoiler Targets for 2002" presents the case in stark terms: "Bob Barr is target No. 1, both in terms of time criticality and in overall importance. To the medical-marijuana movement, Barr is the equivalent of the Antichrist."

Linder does not support medical marijuana, according to his office, but he has a much lower profile on the issue than Barr. A spokesman for Linder tells Insight that the LP has not contacted the congressman about these expenditures, but adds that Linder has a good working relationship with them because of his support for tax reform.

A spokesman for Barr says he, too, is unaware of the LP strategy, but in a written statement to Insight the congressman does not shrink from the challenge: "I'm proud to be the antidrug candidate in this race. … I have been a leader in the war against [illegal] drugs and if the pro-drug folks want to target me with negative ads then that tells me I've been doing a good job in that effort."

In preparing to resist the Libertarian push, Barr might consider consulting with the other vocally antidrug incumbents the LP has targeted. They include Sens. Tim Hutchinson (R-Ark.), Max Cleland (D-Ga.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-Texas). Crickenberger says Americans are ready to move away from drug prohibition, and his party is focusing resources accordingly. "We believe this is a substantial opportunity to move public policy in a Libertarian direction," he says.

Asked for races in which their candidate has a legitimate chance to win, LP officials point to Wisconsin. The Libertarian candidate for governor there is Ed Thompson, a former meat-cutter, prison guard and boxer who currently owns a bar/restaurant called Mr. Ed's Tee-Pee Supper Club and serves as mayor of tiny Tomah. He is polling between 7 and 11 percent, depending on which Democrat wins the primary.

Thompson reportedly was arrested in 1997 for operating illegal video-poker machines out of his bar and charged in 1998 for refusing to cooperate with police after being stabbed in the stomach by a friend. On the surface, he appears about as likely to win as shock-jock Howard Stern, who once toyed with the idea of running for governor of New York on the Libertarian ticket. But Thompson's brother is Tommy Thompson — probably the most popular politician in the state — who resigned as governor of Wisconsin to become President George W. Bush's secretary of health and human services. In an interview with Insight, Ed Thompson says his family name has given him added exposure and insists he is a serious candidate. "I am going to win," Thompson says. "There's no doubt about it."

Acting Gov. Scott McCallum is a Republican who was appointed when Tommy Thompson left for Washington, and he appears vulnerable. The Democrats will not hold primaries until later this summer and, in the meantime, Ed Thompson has been lapping up media attention and increasing his name recognition. He already has appeared on the Today show and was featured in a lengthy piece in the Style section of the Washington Post. In his interview with Insight, he pointed out that he is doing much better in the polls at this stage than another "hopeless" gubernatorial candidate who eventually went on to victory: Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura.

Since strange circumstances sometimes yield unexpected results, another gubernatorial race for Libertarians to watch might be in Massachusetts. Republican Gov. Jane Swift, the once-popular incumbent who gave birth in office to twins, earlier this year decided not to run when it became clear that Republican Mitt Romney, head of the Salt Lake Olympic Organizing Committee, was throwing his hat in the ring. Several Democrats still are battling for the primary nod.

In the midst of it all sits Libertarian Carla Howell. A management consultant who now is campaigning full time, she collected more than 300,000 votes (11.8 percent) in her 2000 bid for the Senate seat of Democrat Edward M. Kennedy; she fell fewer than 26,000 votes short of the Republican candidate. It is impossible to know whether she will control those votes this fall or if they will move to Romney in a close race because none of the polls conducted so far have included her as an option — a snub she dismisses as "absurd" given her showing in 2000.

Howell remains confident, however. She tells Insight that her campaign will spend approximately $1 million by Election Day — an astronomical war chest by Libertarian standards and one that will allow her to buy precious time on television. "I certainly have a chance," she says. "I'm a dark horse, but we'll see."

Howell says her campaign will get a boost from a possible ballot measure that would give voters the chance to eliminate the state's notoriously high income tax. She is cofounder and chairwoman of the ballot initiative — a measure none of the other candidates supports. Asked if she fears her candidacy might "spoil" the election for Romney and give it to a big-spending Democrat, Howell argues that neither Democrats nor Republicans advocate smaller government. "You can't spoil tainted meat," she says.

Dean Myerson, political director for the Green Party, also dismisses criticism that his party spoils elections. "The whole concept with spoilers is that we have a responsibility to protect Democrats when they run bad candidates," Myerson tells Insight. "We're running candidates because that's what our supporters want."

According to Myerson, the Green Party's best chance this year also is in a gubernatorial race, this one in Maine. He says Green candidate Jonathan Carter and his supporters slogged through the Maine winter to get 20 percent of party members to sign a petition supporting the campaign. Myerson says the signatures put Carter on the ballot and made him eligible for public funds. The political director says the campaign eventually should receive "close to $1 million. He's going to have the funds to run a serious campaign."

Opposing Carter will be a Republican, an independent and Rep. John Baldacci (D-Maine), according to Myerson. He says he is unaware of any polls so far, but adds that the crowded field might favor a dark horse. "It's a four-way race," he notes, "so you can win with 30-some percent."

Optimistic predictions aside, these third-party candidates are all long shots — just like Ventura. But Chuck Muth, chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC), is one political operative who takes the third-party threat seriously. The RLC derides as RINOs (Republicans in name only) those GOP officials who stray from their small-government promises and it urges the party to stick to fundamentals such as tax cuts. Muth has worked in Nevada to find common ground between Libertarian and Republican candidates for the state Assembly, cobbling deals so the two parties compete in as few districts as possible. "I wish someone at the national level would do it," he says, noting that more and more elections are coming down to the wire, and that tenuous majorities in both the House and the Senate are on the line. "Two or 3 percent is the spoiler level in a lot of these races," he warns.

I would say within the next 10-15 years yes it will happen UNLESS the GOP starts swinging back right and in the very near future. That was not the case this past POTUS election nor is Washington trying to steer that direction this election far from it looks to me. The GOP in it's lack of wisdom continues to reward those who refuse to lead with leadership positions. No bigger example in the sad state of just how bad off the GOP is than Trent and the clueless Lott who keep him as the senate party leader. He is a disgrace.

When two POTUS candidates one supposedly trying to impersonate a conservative says there is not that much difference between his and an Arch Liberal POTUS Candidates position then the GOP needs to re-think it's positions. Like many others I don't consider myself as having left the GOP I consider it has left me and any shred of Constitutional Doctrine behind.

The GOP's current take this or else attitude is wearing thin. GWB was crowned winner before most states even held a primary. Afterward all Conservative voices were silenced and Rocky Republicans took over the White House and most Cabinet positions.

Ronnie Reagan {no he wasn't perfect by any means} knew better than try this but Bush is no Reagan not by a long shot. Reagan understood he had to work with Conservatives and give them advisory positions. He as well actually bothered to listen!

I see an answer to the primary election problem. On the POTUS election alone make a national primary day the First Tuesday in August. Stop this insane nonsense of the Rocky GOP force feeding the rest of the nation it's Liberalism. I will not vote for a Rocky GOP and yes it's fine with me if a Dem wins instead. Then maybe at least a conservative might get a shot at the seat next election rather than a Rocky Liberal holding it for life.

The GOP after the 1994 wins stopped trying to change the Liberal trend in this nation and instead became a part of it. That is the fualt of GOP leadership and not Bill Clinton. Those injuries were self inflicted. Anyone taking an honest look can see as much. The GOP has dumped the Conservative and what Constitutional values it had to appease the Rocky GOP and some DEMs. When the best the GOP can do for a POTUS candidate is Bob Dole that says it all. That year the GOP sold it's soul.

If the GOP wants to stop the third party factor then it best start taking it's agenda into consideration otherwise stop crying foul each time it runs off persons who are just sick and tired of seeing the GOP self destruct itself and helping the DEM's Liberalize this nation.

But perhaps saddest of all was this past election offered some of the greatest tallent in the GOP in a century. It is clear to me there was a deliberate effort to silence the Conservative GOP this election and in this election as well. Only the inside friends or inner circle of Moderate/Liberal Republicans are getting the jobs and support since Bush took office. They are the ones making policy and their policies stink. Again this was not something Reagan would have done and I find comparisons of Bush to Reagan empty. There is no substance but just wishfull thinking and the undying desire for a legacy. Bush and the GOP needs to start reaching out to conservatives as much as they are the others. Here is a man who tells conservatives to buzz off then goes running to the Log Cabin Republicans. It was a deliberate snub IMO. A snub that continues to this day. If the GOP doen't change it has no one to blame but its leaders for it's coming downfall.

Don't try to blame the policies of individual members of Congress on the entire party. Why not? They are mutually inclusive, you can't have policy proceed without that being a hard cold fact. Will you find a member or two who'll throw out token oppositon? Of course you will. They are fighting a losing battle, ask them, I have. Then to top it off, we have a president who'll sign any trash they send across his desk. Show me one item he has so much as threatened to veto. Just one item. While the house isn't veto proof, show me one piece of legislation they've taken a stand on,(they do provide funding you know) and I'll show you many more they have shown absolute copitulation. Show me one fedguv agency that's had it's budget cut. Furthermore, this grand strategy you bots expouse is behind the full force march to socialism truely escapes me. Perhaps I can be enlightened by someone, not likely, but perhaps. You can argue Ideals, you can't argue Facts. I don't care how you shape or color these actions, they are not Conservative. Blackbird.

Put down the bong. You don't get everything you want overnight. It takes time and it takes some accomodation. That's the nature of politics. I find that people who expect immediate and radical change are usually immature, unrealistic, idealistic self-deluders...

Listen if the GOP can crash and burn {change} as quick as it did from 1994-1996 then it is not unreasonable to expect a reversal that fast as well. Accomodation sent the GOP to the problems it's in now. They forgot they were in power because of their agenda they ran on and not because it was their turn. They sold out their own agenda that put them in power. That is what cost them the senate and nearly the White House last election. They refuse to be Republicans but instead try to be some luke warm Dem variation.

I understand what you are saying, but I disagree on the "whys." The GOP's problem is that it doesn't understand how to play the political game. But the GOP isn't alone here. Just reading the thoughts of 99.9% of FReeper opinions, they don't understand how to play the political game, either.

Wait a minute, Doc. The glue huffing deal is my line. It's a patented Twodeesism. ;-)

Yes, in some ways, Bush is better than Gore could be. In other ways, he's indistinguishable, though. The education bill, CFR, and the Patriot act are all things that I would have expected out of Gore. The pandering to illegals is another. The "Homeland Security" position is something that only a democrat could have dreamed up before Bush came along.

As far as getting candidates on the ballot for Congress goes, the GOP is a lost cause. Their state organizations are rotten to the core and absolutely subservient to the national committee. People like Rudy Guiliani and Liddy Dole are going to be as good as the GOP gets from now on, mark my words. Watch for them to spike the guns of their few good conservative incumbents in the upcoming races, too.

Well I by no means like Al Gore. But I'll say this. If not for Bill Clinton he would be POTUS today. Gore inspite of how we feel about him is a master politican. He learned from the best his dad. Gore nearly won because the GOP was running on me too politics. Rather than make known the differences they chose to lean toward Gores policies or Gore Lite. Gore is a master at "Me Too" politics. The line between a GOP and DEM canidate is becoming too thin these days. It's not good for the nation either. One of the best checks and balances is not to have both parties so close in agreement on most issues. Pick a fight state your objectives and stick with them.

It seems everytime compromise is mentioned it most all the time means the GOP caves to the DEMs. Don't walk up even before debating an issue and give up the fight. The DEM's are eating the GOP alive on this very thing.

I want some good old fashioned mean spirited conservative leaders back in the senate and not the compromising idiots like Lott, Hatch, Spectre, and their likes. Nor do I want to see the same being endorsed for the vaccanies coming up. The White House came out swinging with a moderate senator canidates when aviable conservative were there. The moderates are part of the inner circle I mentioned in my other post. That is foolishness and giving up the fight before it can be fought. Actually I think the White House and RNC needs to stay out of primary elections as far as endorsements go.

Why Democrats should draft George W. Bush in 2004

The surest way to bust this economy is to increase the role and the size of the federal government."
George W. Bush - Source: Presidential debate, Boston MA Oct 3, 2000.

Gore offers an old and tired approach. He offers a new federal spending program to nearly every voting bloc. He expands entitlements, without reforms to sustain them. 285 new or expanded programs, and $2 trillion more in new spending. Spending without discipline, spending without priorities, and spending without an end. Al Gore’s massive spending would mean slower growth and higher taxes. And it could mean an end to this nation’s prosperity."
George W. Bush Source: Speech in Minneapolis, Minnesota Nov 1, 2000.

"People need more money in their pocket, as far as I’m concerned."
George W. Bush - The Tampa (FL) Tribune Oct 26, 2000.

"I think the economy has grown really in spite of government. This is an incredible period of time when productivity has been enhanced, not because of any great initiative of government, but because of the ability for entrepreneurs to stake a new claim."
George W. Bush - Source: Ronald Brownstein, LA Times Aug 13, 2000

I was deeply concerned about the drift toward a more powerful federal government. I was particularly outraged by two pieces of legislation, the Natural Gas Policy Act and the Fuel Use Act. It seemed to me that elite central planners were determining the course of our nation. Allowing the government to dictate the price of natural gas was a move toward European-style socialism. If the federal government was going to take over the natural gas business, what would it set its sights on next?"
George W. Bush - Source: “A Charge to Keep”, p.172-173 Dec 9, 1999

Un El día En El la vida de Jorge W. La arbusto

"Immigration is not a problem to be solved, it is the sign of a successful nation."
George W. Bush - Source: Speech in Washington, D.C. Jun 26, 2000.

"In September of last year, I welcomed my good friend, the President of Mexico, to the White House. Standing together on the South Lawn, President Fox and I spoke of building a hemisphere of freedom and prosperity and progress."

Foolin' them is easy isn't it? Heck yes.

A UNICEF-funded book being passed out at the United Nations Child Summit encourages children to engage in sexual activities with other minors and with homosexuals and animals

Clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick, not once, but twice

"That’s why I’m for instant background checks at gun shows. I’m for trigger locks."
George W. Bush - Source: St. Louis debate Oct 17, 2000

Infant fetal tissue research, cloning, overseas abortion funding, etc. One might argue that anything you've listed here can creep in as an issue at any given moment. None of this has been wiped off the slate. One could even argue, if the statist on both sides of the aisle see an opportunity, they will take this stuff into the midnight hour, where they think you ain't watching, and do as they damn well please, ala NAFTA/GATT and a myriad of other sweet little "conservative" issues, and I (my feabile little self) can predict without fear, POTUS would sign every bit into Law. You know why they think they can do it and get away with it? Because they can! The bots will still pull that lever on election day, afterall, the programming has been good and long in the making. Which lever? It doesn't matter! Only a few will be for the third choice, from those of us who refuse indoctrination. Vote your concience, we get the gubmint we deserve. Blackbird.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.