George Wallace. Strom Thurmond. Ralph Nader. Lyndon La Rouche.
What do these failed, third-party presidential candidacies have in common?
They lost and lost badly.
Not only did they lose by landslide proportions, but they enabled in the case of George Wallace to ensure the election of Richard Nixon over Vice-President Hubert Humphrey in 1968 while Ralph Nader’s bitter and disturbed candidacy gave us George Bush in 2000 over Vice-President Al Gore!
The point of most third-party candidacies is not to win, but to disrupt the democratic process and bitterly attack the major party hopefuls in the hopes of swaying the election from a candidate they personally despise.
In other words, they know they cannot win so they file to hurt another candidate who can.
In most cases, these candidates lack the resume, support, money and resources (especially at the local level) to have a meaningful impact on the outcome or results.
The American electoral system has benefited from a thriving and fruitful two-party process.
Only a handful of times had a third-party candidate qualified for a presidential debate (twice) or even secured an electoral vote (1948 & 1968).
In 2000 Vice-President Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College to George W Bush because of the candidacy of Ralph Nader, an embittered and nasty individual who changed the results in a single state (Florida) that drove the country into a virtual constitutional crisis which led to the Supreme Court determining the outcome of the election some 18 years ago.
Is that what voters really want?
Ironically in most cases, these “independent” candidacies are neither Independent or viable and are rather disgruntled former Democrats or Republicans rejected by their respective parties.
They didn’t get what they wanted which is to be nominated by their party because in most cases, they cannot and could not win!
Political Parties don’t nominate unpopular candidates with little to offer in terms of resume, fundraising or message.
They want to offer voters the best possible choices so that they may govern.
And if they disagree with the choices of their party, they have the option of running in the primary as did some NA Democrats did successfully so in 2006.
After the primary was over there was peace and they went on to win the general election rather easily despite the party squabble!
The primary brought political unity; third-party challenges breed contempt on the system that promotes a bitterness that is unhealthy to the body politic!
In fact, they really don’t care if they lose or that they convinced someone to toss their vote away on a political pipe dream!
It is this kind of hollow behavior and disregard for the process that deteriorates democracy and voter confidence in those legitimate and credible candidates who actually have something to offer and say!
Here in North Arlington we have had two cases of independent filings with miserable results.
In 2004 Democrats Phil Spanola & Peter Massa were swept to office in a landslide as they received 3,065 and 3,282 votes respectively while the independent candidacy of one George McDermott received just 854 votes.
Ironically, Massa is the Democratic nominee in 2018 for Borough Council and understands the debilitating nature of such candidacies!
In 2005, Republicans decided not to field any candidates, and McDermott filed a ticket this time again being soundly defeated by Democrats Jim Ferriero and then Councilman Steve Tanelli by margins of about 800 votes. Tanelli is now a freeholder and Mark Yampaglia won a council vacancy against another former Democrat who ran as a third-party by a margin of 2143-1305 or 838 votes.
Yampaglia is this year’s Democratic nominee for mayor challenging incumbent Republican Joe Bianchi.
“Third-party candidates are not really concerned with either winning or governing. They know they can’t win so governing is out of the question. It is a failed practice of disruption into leading some people to believe they serve as an alternative, but only seek to divide a nation, state or community. There’s a reason why a legitimate third or fourth party has never resonated because voters quite frankly are happy with two solid choices rather than diluting the field with unknown or unqualified options not vetted by a primary or party process,” noted one political observer of the NA race for mayor.
“Historically and traditionally third-party candidates are isolated from political and governing realities. They lack any legislative support because they have no real idea on how to govern. A perfect example of this was the failed tenure of professional wrestler Jesse “The Body” Ventura as governor of Minnesota. One independent is actively attacking local Democrats day in and day out, alienating voters and demonstrating the point that it’s not about government but political payback and revenge,” offered one Bergen County Democrat on the current status of the race.
“Such candidacies answer to no one. They’re not vetted and not required to demonstrate political support. It is in many cases a misguided ego trip. You get to see your name in lights or on a sign. That’s why some people call politics Hollywood for the ugly,” noted one observer about third-party campaigns.
“Voters want an optimistic and positive message. That’s why candidacies like FDR, JFK, Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama won and were successful. Tearing down others and personalizing campaigns that weigh into the gutter never work and never will, especially in a venue like North Arlington.”