Third Party Speculation
I've watched various attempts at third parties in this country start out quite hopefully. Unfortunately, they seem to have all ended badly in one way or another. Now Peggy Noonan, writing in the Opinion Journal speculates on whether the time is right, finally.
Something's happening. I have a feeling we're at some new beginning, that a big breakup's coming, and that though it isn't and will not be immediately apparent, we'll someday look back on this era as the time when a shift began.
All my adult life, people have been saying that the two-party system is ending, that the Democrats' and Republicans' control of political power in America is winding down. According to the traditional critique, the two parties no longer offer the people the choice they want and deserve. Sometimes it's said they are too much alike–Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Sometimes it's said they're too polarizing–too red and too blue for a nation in which many see things through purple glasses.
In 1992 Ross Perot looked like the breakthrough, the man who would make third parties a reality. He destabilized the Republicans and then destabilized himself. By the end of his campaign he seemed to be the crazy old aunt in the attic.
The Perot experience seemed to put an end to third-party fever. But I think it's coming back, I think it's going to grow, and I think the force behind it is unique in our history.
The history of the third party has been that it acted as a spoiler. Having no real chance to be elected themselves, they only succeeded in denying office to someone else. Noonan may have hit on something with her observation of why the third party approach is so far missing the mark. It is in the way the third party has framed itself.
The problem is not that the two parties are polarized. In many ways they're closer than ever. The problem is that the parties in Washington, and the people on the ground in America, are polarized. There is an increasing and profound distance between the rulers of both parties and the people–between the elites and the grunts, between those in power and those who put them there.
On the ground in America, people worry terribly–really, there are people who actually worry about it every day–about endless, weird, gushing government spending. But in Washington, those in power–Republicans and Democrats–stand arm in arm as they spend and spend. (Part of the reason is that they think they can buy off your unhappiness one way or another. After all, it's worked in the past. A hunch: It's not going to work forever or much longer. They've really run that trick into the ground.)
On the ground in America, regular people worry about the changes wrought by the biggest wave of immigration in our history, much of it illegal and therefore wholly connected to the needs of the immigrant and wholly unconnected to the agreed-upon needs of our nation. Americans worry about the myriad implications of the collapse of the American border. But Washington doesn't. Democrat Ted Kennedy and Republican George W. Bush see things pretty much eye to eye. They are going to educate the American people out of their low concerns.
There is a widespread sense in America–a conviction, actually–that we are not safe in the age of terror. That the port, the local power plant, even the local school, are not protected. Is Washington worried about this? Not so you'd notice. They're only worried about seeming unconcerned.
More to the point, people see the Republicans as incapable of managing the monster they've helped create–this big Homeland Security/Intelligence apparatus that is like some huge buffed guy at the gym who looks strong but can't even put on his T-shirt without help because he's so muscle-bound. As for the Democrats, who co-created Homeland Security, no one–no one–thinks they would be more managerially competent. Nor does anyone expect the Democrats to be more visionary as to what needs to be done. The best they can hope is the Democrats competently serve their interest groups and let the benefits trickle down.
Right now the Republicans and Democrats in Washington seem, from the outside, to be an elite colluding against the voter. They're in agreement: immigration should not be controlled but increased, spending will increase, etc.
She may have really nailed it here. The two existing parties are so closely aligned these days that the people on the ground really can't tell them apart anymore. Tax and spend Democrats morph seamlessly into tax and spend Republicans. I still don't know if a third party can succeed, but there is certainly some food for thought here for both parties right now.
Other Links to this Post
-
Odyssey and Oracle — Thursday, 1 June , 2006 @ 10:57 am
By Mr. K., Thursday, 1 June , 2006 @ 8:29 pm
I can only speak for myself, but I’d support a third party candidate that was a true populist. Meaning, someone who is staunchly middle class, who has morals and resistant to lobbyists and corporate interests. Someone who understands that the biggest issues facing America are paying for daily expenses (health care, retirement, gas, food) and earning a living paycheck to paycheck. The republicans and dems are both living in another world, that of trust funds, inherited money and capital gains. Bring on the class warfare and the majority will follow.
By Gaius, Thursday, 1 June , 2006 @ 8:39 pm
A third party would actually be a good thing about now. I’m not sure it would work, though, given it’s past history.
By Black Jack, Friday, 2 June , 2006 @ 12:41 pm
Conservatives see themselves as stuck with the GOP because there isn’t any viable alternative, and the GOP takes us for granted, similar to the way Dems take the Black vote for granted.
However, as the core of a new third party, Conservatives joined by libertarians and Reagan Democrats would form a block strong enough to swing elections left or right depending on the issue. At the very least, even seriously talking about it would attract the very focused attention of the Republican Party.
Given the outrage over the Senate’s immigration bill, all it would take is some charismatic leader to unite around. It can’t be someone like McCain either. It would take a real Conservative leader, someone in the mold of Ronald Reagan could pull it off. The time is right, the issue is on the table, all that remains is for the right man to step up and it’s a done deal.