Possible Third Party Runs

May 7th, 2008 in Featured Posts by Hillel Aron

Perot in ’92. Nader in ’00. Third party runs can have big impacts. Had the Republicans nominated Mitt Romney, we’d probably be hearing a lot about Chuck Hagel, Michael Bloomberg, and Unity ’08. But the fact is that McCain and the Democratic nominee (almost certainly Obama) will be fighting a pitched battle for centrists. Both will claim to be experts in the art of the compromise.

The match-up, however, will leave a few issues that a third party candidate could exploit. None of the major party candidates are anti-illegal immigration. Some issues, such as free-trade, withdrawing troops from Iraq, and cutting taxes, leave room for candidates with more extreme views to gain traction.

Let’s look at a few possible third party candidates.

	Mike Gravel
	Positions:	Gravel, strangely enough, is running for the Libertarian nomination. While his support for the fair tax and ending the war on drugs will likely please Libertarians, he’s basically an uber-lefty: he supports universal health care, which is about as big government as a policy gets. He also favors a carbon tax, social security, and a gun licensing program. If this guy’s a Libertarian, I’m the King of England. The fact is, Mike Gravel is probably psychotic. Either that, or his candidacy is an elaborate piece of performance art.
	Odds he’ll run:	Gravel is just crazy enough to run even if he doesn’t get the Libertarian nod, but his support will likely be so weak that he won’t be able to afford a substantial campaign.
	Impact:	A Gravel run would likely drain a large percentage of votes away from Ralph Nader.

	Bob Barr
	Positions:	Barr, too, is running for the Libertarian nomination. As a Senator, he was a committed Republican but his views have, um, evolved over the years; he now regrets his yea vote on the Patriot Act and supports medical marijuana. Look for Barr to be a fierce critic of the Bush administration and, by extension, John McCain. Will probably bring a government-is-best-when-it-governs-least perspective to the table.
	Odds he’ll run:	Fairly high, either as a Libertarian or Independent. He has Gravel’s name recognition and a firmer grasp on reality.
	Impact:	Depends on which side of libertarianism he decides to emphasize; if he stresses his anti-immigration stance (which, in my opinion, he should if he wants more than a dozen votes), then he could seriously hurt McCain. If he emphasizes his hands-off foreign policy, he could hurt the Democratic nominee — but not much. It’s hard to imagine that Barr, who went after Bill Clinton with such ferocity, could ever endear himself to liberals.

	Ralph Nader
	Positions:	Ralph Nader supports Ralph Nader running for President.
	Odds he’ll run:	Already running.
	Impact:	Could seriously hurt Gravel’s chances.

	Ron Paul
	Positions:	The alpha-libertarian in politics today. His nickname is Dr. No, a reference to the fact that he’s a doctor who votes “no” on practically every piece of legislation that involves some form of government spending. He wants the U.S. army out of everywhere and is against both the war on drugs and the Patriot Act. He’s also against U.S. participation in the U.N., abortion, and gun-control. And he wants to abolish the Federal Reserve and return to the Gold Standard.
	Odds he’ll run:	Paul doesn’t seem very interested in running a third-party campaign. On the other hand, he’s one of the only politicians today with a major grass-roots / net-roots following. They may not deliver enough votes to win primaries, but they have a huge Internet presence and donate a ton of money. This group of rabid Paul fans (called “Paultards” by Wonkette) may convince their hero to run.
	Impact:	Paul, too, could position himself as the ultimate peacenick, the candidate who would really end the war in Iraq. In that case, he could suck votes away from the Democratic nominee. On the other hand, Paul’s voting base isn’t exactly Democrats: Paul supporters tend to be pro-gun, anti-abortion, and anti-illegal immigration. They’re partial to Paul’s economic populism, but they’re also partial to the view that 9-11 was an inside job and that vaccinations cause autism.

– Hillel Aron