At first glance the timing seems ripe for the long-anticipated, never realized of a legitimate third party. One would think there are votes out there for a pragmatic, middle of the road solution based party in the “Independent” space that exists between the Democrats and Republicans. If this 99% movement has any legs you could probably squeeze out some permanent space on the left with the Green Party. And the mid-terms showed the “tea party” seemed to carve out a spot that isn’t accurately described as far right, it’s more of a Bizzaro Obama. So why aren’t we talking about a potential third party option in 2012?
History is not kind to third parties in America. Save for a Teddy Roosevelt led progressive party and Ross Perot’s efforts to boost Dana Carvey’s profile there hasn’t been a third party candidate that cracked 10% of the popular vote in a Presidential election since the Civil War despite history being filled with instances of the American public being fed up with both parties. Why is that?
Since its never fun talking about the pragmatics in the middle and we don’t know much about the urban hipsters on the left yet, let’s talk about [insert “nuts” or “patriots” here depending on your political leanings] in the tea party. One example can be gleaned from the Know Nothing Party of the 1850s. And before my tea party friends* get all up in arms about equating their ilk to a party that seems at first glance to bask proudly in its own ignorance let me make two points.
- Read on before filling the comments section with poorly spelled and grammatically incorrect rants… save those for anyone who fails to acknowledge Cardinal fans as the self-proclaimed best fans in professional sports.
- I am well aware that many tea party members are highly intelligent and reasonable folks well versed on topics ranging from NASCAR to Michelle Bachman’s version of American History to deep frying sugary snacks.
* When I say “tea party friends” I mean it in the sense that a conservative Republican refers to their gay friends in a debate. In other words I can mention them anonymously at an attempt to justify a closed mind but I haven’t actually met them myself.
The Know-Nothings are one of a host third parties over the past 150 years that rose based on the strength of one central issue – which is almost always related to an economic slowdown – or blatant racism under the guise of nationalism (see Thurmond, Strom). And the The Know Nothings weren’t named derisively, when you asked a member about party activities they were to reply “I Know Nothing”, the term became somewhat of a slur only after GOP standard-bearer and original Fan-o-Palin Bill Kristol used it as such in an editorial. If you want to Google the two columns I am referring to you’ll get a nice little slice of irony – one introduces the world to a certain Alaskan governor and the other is where the “Republican Establishment” starts to turn against the Tea Party. It’s all you though because there is no way I’m spending more than 15 seconds scanning the Bill Kristol archives, if you can handle it you’re a stronger person than I.
The Know-Nothings were founded on the premise that there were too many Germans and Irish streaming into the country and taking the jobs of the “Native Born Americans” – which you probably already translated to not include actual Native Americans. There are two lessons here. One, sometimes history repeats itself; with immigration, it repeats itself at every 25-50 years. Two, if you want to see how easy it is to eliminate immigration between economic disparate two areas can be head out to your local St. Patrick’s Day Parade next year.
The party actually succeeded in putting people in high profile elected offices in the 1850s and grabbed 23% of the Presidential vote in 1856, but was largely extinct by 1860. It’s a refrain that has been repeated like clockwork – party rises, makes waves in one or two presidential elections and fades away only to torment high school students during history quizzes. So the question remains why no viable third party has been able to every make “the leap” in 150 years?
We’re 1,000 words deep at this point and I haven’t made one sports analogy here you go. It’s like going from 7 or 9 wins to 10+ in the NFL. You can get to nine wins with solid coaching, good health and a bit of luck… just look at the last 10 years of Bears’ football. But consistently getting to 10+ wins a year is extremely hard and doesn’t come easy – for starters you need a GM that can hit on 10% of his first round picks.
Make no mistake about it, just getting a movement to a point where it can get 5% of the vote requires a great deal of skill, timing and luck. Consider the circumstance surrounding the “rise” of the tea party:
- 10 years of rising debt
- Global economic contraction and high domestic unemployment
- Growing gap between the haves and have-nots
- Inability of the Democrats or Republicans to present a solution together, or independently
- Simmering immigration issue that allows for a nationalistic/populist bent to the central message
- Surplus of tri-point hats
When the ability to capitalize upon that set of simultaneous circumstances is the easy part you know the next step is like cracking a 4 minute mile. Right now the tea party could run some sort of Perry/Bachmann ticket in a Romeny v. Obama election and grab 10% of the vote and possibly even a southern state or two regardless on your position on giving a rip about Alabama. But to make that leap, you’ve got to start putting together an all-encompassing platform… preferably a coherent one. And that’s where the fun begins.
Getting 5% of the room to agree on one topic is easy, but every time you add a topic it gets a bit harder. And then there’s the human leadership element. The skills to ignite the electorate and craft a vision to develop a long-term political growth plan are often mutually exclusives. And even if you come into both skills, you’re going to need a leader young enough, patient enough and a succession plan strong enough to make this happen over 20 years. Plus that leader was probably already snatched up by a hedge fund because he wanted to make $5 million before his 25th birthday rather than logging the same number of hours building a grassroots organization while working at Best Buy weekends to make ends meet.
Do you see that person amongst the tea party leadership? I’m certainly not a subscriber to their newsletter in a manner of speaking but even my most generous assessment of the current crop of tea party politicians doesn’t see a force to be reckoned with amongst this cast… I don’t even see a Eugene Debbs here.
You can’t help but think that the moment of truth is approaching where voters are no longer just swayed by the deficit as their one issue. Will the tea party buck the trend and prove that the establishment line of thought is the one that knows nothing. Or will there be a high school kid in 2050 trying to remember the difference between the Free Soil Party and the Tea Party for a high school quiz?