Why Al Gore Makes the Perfect Third Party Candidate
Yes, I know it is crazy to think of Al Gore as a third party candidate. Yet, just for fun, why not suspend your initial dismissal of this idea for a moment and walk through this thought-exercise with me? I’m betting the Republicans of 1912 would have dismissed the notion of a third party Theodore Roosevelt, but look what happened when they took Teddy’s supporters for granted - it cost them the White House.
I’ve polled sixteen friends and acquaintances with the question, “If Al Gore were to run as a third party candidate, would you still vote for him?” Of these sixteen, eleven said YES. The others were on the fence. Not one responded with an outright NO. My friend David responded, “I love the idea of him running so that he would get his ideas out there and so that the platform for his ideas would be made even greater. To have his notions raised and covered by the greater media channels is what we need.”
Take a look at the current situation: ‘Democrat’ Joe Lieberman is threatening to hand control of the Senate to the Republicans by switching parties if any legit anti-Iraq war resolution is passed. Party front-runners Clinton and Obama are both on record saying that they refuse to take the threat of NUCLEAR attack on Iran off the table. Democrat and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been unable to muster much of her promised ‘revolution.’ The Democrats, in a few short months, are coming apart at the seams. Has there been a better time for a liberal third party? Has there been a bigger name on the sidelines with more critical experience than Albert Arnold Gore, Jr.?
Briefly then, as I’m really only out to foster debate and get this idea rolling, are some reasons that Gore would do well by running as an outsider:
1. Again, has there been a bigger name on the sidelines with more experience?
Flash back to 1992. Ross Perot leads the vote over Clinton and Bush with only a few months to go. The victory was his to give away and he did, by dropping out of the race. Why did Perot get so close to taking The Prize? Because he was the man the public believed had the most experience with the most pressing topic - the economy. Gore, too, has a grasp on the issue of the time - the environment. It’s a cakewalk for the right team (something Gore has never had) to tie environmental considerations into any arena - from resource scarcity (war) to agriculture (food) to economic stability (energy), and so on - making the environment the true focal point of the 2008 election.
2. A Gore run would give automatic credibility to third parties.
This would be very, very good for U.S. politics for so many, many reasons. As with Perot, the corrupt Commission on Presidential Debates would be forced to allow Gore into the televised debates, meaning the debates may turn into something worth watching for a change (as they would have been in ‘00 and ‘04 had Nader been invited). Hearing more than two voices on a topic is critical to developing an exchange that represents the full spectrum of the thoughts and ideals of the U.S. citizenry.
3. There is no strong candidate currently running.
Sure, Clinton may be the first electable woman to run and Obama the first electable (how I despise this term as it neuters the spirit of the left) citizen of African origins (the newest PC term), but a minority status has zero to do with whether or not one is fit for the Presidency. McCain, well, he’s a faux-maverick, back-peddling, pro-war candidate. Edwards is a bright spot, but Clinton and the Carlyle Group have squashed his chances. In a Clinton-McCain election, voters would be given (key word) the delightful choice between Warmonger A and Warmonger B. Throw Al Gore into the mix and these two will eat each other alive, leaving Gore a clear path to victory. Advantage, Gore, by a whopping margin.
4. Environmentalism finally gets a real platform. To date, neither major party has announced ANY plans for a truly ambitious program to combat climate change. Pelosi and company have done better than the Republicans, but they’ve still yet to put forth anything that moves anywhere near the accelerated timetable required (for more information, read ‘Plan B 2.0′ by Lester Brown). The Green Party in the U.S. is still far from the militant, hyper-organized machine that it needs to become to be taken seriously. It has some great people at the top, but it’s local chapters are rag-tag and riddled with tired ex-hippies who are more concerned with repeating the tired chants of the 1960s than embracing real change. No, Al Gore could single-handedly create a Party that is strengthened by its commitment to the ethical stewardship of the planet.
5. Gore needs separation from the Democrats. (I know, he’s not enough of his own man to leave his father’s party behind, but . . .) For so many reasons. For starters, he has been working feverishly to craft bipartisan support of his mission. Signing on to the home team will only ruin the advances he has made. If he is brave enough to show the citizenry and the world that he actually walks the walk, then his tarnished history will be burnished like never before. Remember, he more or less sat on his hands for eight years as a dem V.P., apparently waiting for ‘his turn’. This time he can put his passions ahead of career advancement, spurning the safe road of partisan politics while distancing himself from the cigar-sucking conservative Clinton administration that usurped his soul.
6. He could avoid partisan politics. Related to #5. Gore has spent so much time coming off as nonpartisan that it would be a real shame to see him throw this away by running as a Democrat. Aligning himself with a party that has a poor track record where his expertise is concerned is a questionable tactic. As an independent, Gore would be able to play the role of a true bipartisan peacemaker, a real man-in-the-middle. This would also free him from toeing a party line on numerous divisive issues. Now more than ever, the American citizens are starving for a President who will make decisions based on the good of the people, not the party.
7. This would allow him more time to weigh his options. As a third party candidate, Gore can afford to let his rivals smash each other publicly, exposing one another’s weak points in the process. He would also be able to see what develops in domestic and international politics. For example, if we nuke Iran, environmental considerations are off the table for the rest of the decade, if not longer as the world as we know it devolves into infinite chaos. In which case, Gore’s candidacy bid suffers immensely. It’s strange to me that, with two years+ to go, some are already saying that it’s “late” to get into the campaign. Pffft. That’s nonsense. Give me a candidate, a bunch of money (Warren? Bill?) and six months and I can promise you that s/he will be elected.
8. He has the organization and grass roots campaign in place. With Gore’s network of organizations, friends and supporters, he could get on ballots in 50 states in three days flat, without a doubt. What’s more, he can tap into people he needs with very little effort. I’m betting that the past few years have taught him that relying on D.C. advisers is a bad idea and this time around, he’d be more than willing to work with image makers and publicists who are actually a part of his constituency. Given this, he’d have another big advantage over Clinton/Obama/McCain/Giuliani who will all turn to the same out-of-touch strategists who so badly play each and every hand.That’s all for now. There are a number of other reasons but I’m going to table them until I hear back from you, dearest friends and readers on just the inanity/genius of mulling this option. What do you think?
Oh, the daily song! Almost forgot: I hereby decree ‘Revolution’ by The Cult as Al Gore’s official theme song.
Photography credit goes to the hyper-talented James Rexroad, whose permission I did not seek but whose forgiveness I very much do. Click the link and hire James for something, already - if only to help assuage my guilt.
Tags: 2008 Election, Politics, Ruminations
Tod, You have presented compelling reasons for urging Gore to run as a third party candidate. Those who are listening to Gore are convinced that he’s not throwing in the hat re a possible run for President. By running with the Green Party, the most logical choice, he won’t have to buck the Democratic Leadership Council, which appears to have its hands on quite a few of the Democratic Party purse strings.
And Obama? Forget him if you care about the environment. Despite the overwhelming amount of information on the total lack of efficacy and efficiency of converting corn to ethanol, he supports this.
Todd, Yes! You have laid out a compelling, inspired argument. I would do anything to convince my guy, Mr. Al Gore, to run as a third party candidate. I agree completly with Gail. Can’t add anything except “Why not?” and Yes!
Obama just doesn’t know enough or seem to care enough at this point. The Democratic leadership knows very well that the environment is NOT going to make or break a candidate. UNLESS a pro-environment candidate clearly illustrates the interconnectedness of all systems. Gore did a nice job in the movie, but didn’t expand into the politics of scarcity, et cetera. He still can, however. His eight years as VP afford him the luxury of not worrying about trying to prove his experience or knowledge - he can spend less energy here and more energy on, well, energy!
Thanks, Alexandra. It’s a very basic argument, but so far I haven’t been able to get the liberal blogosphere to pay a whit of attention. I think the concept is just too much of a stretch. The more we stretch, however, the more flexible we become, no?
[...] Tod Brilliant wrote a good post on the reasons that Al Gore is the perfect third party canidate for the 2008 presidency. it sure would be great to see such a changing event happen and shake up our two party political system. by avoiding the partisan politics he can focus on bigger issues than which party is better. Gore’s environmental focus would become a platform and real policy could be developed protecting our planet and our future. check out Tod’s points.   [...]
Great points Tod. We need major changes and introducing a third party that actually does something would be a good start. So would having a leader who has a grip on reality. Keep stretching out the concept.
Thanks, Ben. I’m hoping that people like yourself and others in the ecosphere work on teasing the concept and ’stretching the points’ as well. It may sound like a pipe dream, but the idea of a major third party candidate seems more plausible when one recalls that Perot led for TWO MONTHS against Clinton and Bush as recently as 1992. It can be done. Does Gore have the gumption and vision to pull it off? Hard to say at this point.
Frankly, I am surprised and concerned that there is not more talk about Third Party Candidates given our current two-party Corporate-controlled options, which are simply not acceptable.
Ah, JP. . .someone after my still beating heart. Remember that 90% of those who voted for Nader have been made to felt as if they made a mistake. The 2-Party system has never had a better stranglehold. The Dem voters actually are looking to Clinton as a savior which doesn’t shock me but depresses the hell out of me, considering her record, her words, and her corporate partners. We’re a nation of truly uninformed, utterly uninspired, and wholly deserving of our fate.
todb,
Current dissent for the 2-party system equals the strength of the 2-party stranglehold…so ‘08 should be interesting.
A mistake many businesses make is to never again try something that once failed in the past. Same is true in government and politics. Timing is everything.
Beyond all that, I have always believed that folks should just ignore the analysts, the what ifs, the media, political strategy, and just vote their mind. We’d be amazed at the results if this happened.
Parting thought: If I was a member of a two party system, I would be guaranteed a 50/50 chance of winning during any election. Why would I ever want to change those odds? As a matter of fact, I might even collaborate with the other party to ensure the integrity of those odds. The key words in your comment above are: “have been made to felt” … it’s all spin and it’s coming from both parties.
Again, just a thought…
How would a third party be any different? Would they somehow be immune to corporate moneys? They only thing they’d have going for them is that they wouldn’t be tied to one of the two parties.
So…what, then we’d just cut out the middleman and corporate influence would go straight to the candidate instead of being funneled through the party?
Then, it wouldn’t be called the independent party, it would be the Exxon Mobile Party or the Fox Party, or T-Mobile / Google partnership party.
Good points, Kirk. The advantage of multiple parties, at least as evidenced in them Euro-pee-an countries, is the need for coalition building. Of course, humans are prone to corruption (look at Al Gore’s oil money, for example) and no third party would be free from this vice, yet, if fored to work with three or six other parties, often times there is more discussion, more chance to really get at nuances. Yes, governing by committee has some flaws as well, but what we’re currently doing is leaving out a huge number of folks (in terms of representation).
An eloquent summation…
A Conspiracy of Two Parties
The Grand Delusion
By JOEL S. HIRSCHHORN
“With an endless, futile and costly Iraq war, a stinking economy and
most Americans seeing the country on the wrong track, the greatest
national group delusion is that electing Democrats in 2008 is what the
country needs.
Keith Olbermann was praised when he called the Bush presidency a criminal conspiracy. That missed the larger truth. The whole two-party political system is a criminal conspiracy hiding behind illusion
induced delusion.”
Full article at: http://counterpunch.org/hirschhorn11102007.html
People aren’t left of of the political ring due to party affiliation; they are left out due to finances. Politics is a rich man’s game.
If you were to somehow remove the incredible amount of capital it takes to run for any office, you could dilute each party with a better pool from which to chose from.