Will political debacle provide 3rd-party opening?
By Paul Goldman and Mark J. Rozell
Liberals have made plain their unhappiness, bordering on outrage for some, with the debt-ceiling compromise. But could this anger grow into a third party 2012 presidential run? History says no, but if this debt crisis plays out in a way that further alienates working class white voters, all bets are off.
Despite years of complaining about being taken for granted, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party has never managed such a credible challenge.
The fuel for such a candidacy has always come from white working class anger. Today, these families face a historic wage and wealth squeeze, but it has been far worse for African-American and Latino working families.
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill said they needed to cut a debt deal in large measure to avoid angering Wall Street and foreign bond holders, along with the credit agencies. But this offering could backfire if the economy doesn’t improve.
As history has shown time and again, the right protest candidate could say Washington chose to protect Wall Street while forgetting about Main Street.
A default-avoiding deal that creates a white working class backlash could be trouble for both President Obama and his GOP opponent in unpredictable ways. That’s how past third-party movements have gotten their footing.
While none has ever come close to winning an electoral college majority, many have fundamentally altered presidential campaign dynamics.
Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 (27 percent), H. Ross Perot in 1992 (19 percent), Bob LaFollette in 1924 (17 percent) and George Wallace in 1968 (14 percent) hit double digits.
Two independent Democrats running against President Harry Truman in 1948 helped lull favored Republican Thomas Dewey into an unwarranted complacency. Even Ralph Nader’s pathetic 2000 run arguably cost Al Gore enough votes in Florida to lose the state, and the White House.
Significant third-party candidacies have all had a rough common denominator: Each accused the major parties of putting narrow special interests over what they defined as the interest of the working families whom they claimed to better represent.
Consider Perot. In 1992, he used the North American Free Trade Agreement to symbolize how Washington helped big business at the workers’ expense. The Texan further claimed that the huge national debt run up by both parties put the American dream in hock to Wall Street bond holders. Although quitting the race at one point, only to rejoin it with an unqualified running mate, he still received nearly 20 percent of the vote.
Imagine a Perot running today, using those famous charts to show our increasing dependence on Chinese bankers not to mention a budget deal threatening to hollow out his beloved military. Moreover, he would now have debt-ceiling negotiations to effectively ask the elderly — a massive voting bloc — whether they could trust either major party.
Indeed, the belief that Washington power brokers always favor “the big boys” runs deep in our culture. Most Americans today think Washington bailed out the international bankers instead of holding them accountable. In fact, an astonishing 40 percent say the situation in Washington is the worst they have seen in their lifetimes.
The polls also say most parents fear that the American dream might be over for their golden years and, worse yet, for their children. In politics, voter perception is reality. Such levels of economic anxiety present the classic cauldron for a credible voice to appeal to frustrated voters by asking simply: “Who lost America?”
Assume it’s early next year and voter anxiety is unabated. A modern-day Perot could promise to put “America back to work” and take back a government he claimed wholly owned by the special interests.
History says Democrats in Washington are right not to worry too greatly about the elite liberal outrage emanating from these debt negotiations. These folks tend to talk a good game. But suppose historic white working class anger melds with equally justifiable discontent among non-white families? It’s unlikely to happen today. But it might be only a double-dip recession away.
Paul Goldman is former chairman of the Democratic Party of Virginia. Mark J. Rozell is professor of public policy at George Mason University. They contributed this article to USA Today.