Gordon L. Weil
Voters seem to be worried about the leading presidential candidates.
They worry about how far Donald Trump would go in departing
from political norms. They worry simply about how far Joe Biden would go.
Because both the former president and his successor appear
highly likely to be the major party nominees, the election might not do much to
close the nearly even political divide.
Along comes the “No Labels” party, its name designed to show
that it is not affiliated with either the Democrats or the Republicans. It may propose an “independent” candidate,
who could appeal to “the center” that is ignored by the two major parties.
No Labels should be a nonstarter. It is both misleading and misguided.
It relies on polling to show both the lack of enthusiasm for
Biden and Trump and the presence of a large number of moderates who might
prefer a middle-of-the-road candidate.
To build a third party relying on polls may be a mistake. Many people refuse to participate, and it’s
possible that those who reply do not provide complete or wholly honest answers.
The word “moderate” itself may not mean neutral between the
parties as much as “pragmatic” in wanting government to work, through compromise
if necessary. But what would be an
acceptable compromise?
Maine Democratic Rep. Jared Golden tried. He proposed a compromise to the debt ceiling
deadlock. It was hailed in the Washington
Post. It was completely ignored even by
so-called moderates in Congress. The
partisan war continued.
The No Labels group takes credit for helping create the
bi-partisan House “problem solvers” caucus, supposedly bringing together
moderates from both parties. But, does it work?
It has been silent on the debt ceiling, except for Golden, a member.
Third party presidential candidates, no matter how well
intentioned, may serve as “spoilers,” potentially depriving a major party of
enough votes to tip the election to the other side. It’s impossible to know how the third-party
backers might otherwise have voted, so spoiler status is a possibility not a
certainty.
Yet it may have happened when Bill Clinton defeated George
H.W. Bush in 1992. Independent Ross Perot could have taken GOP votes away from
Bush. Maybe Ralph Nader caused Al Gore’s
loss to the younger Bush in 2000.
The presumed answer is that No Labels will put together a
president-vice president ticket with a representative of each party. That would be meant to deal with the spoiler
issue. But the presidential nominee
would be the only candidate that mattered.
Who is backing No Labels?
Knowing that would tell us a lot about the kinds of “moderate” policies
it would support. For example, how would
it balance Medicaid spending with tax cuts? People with enough money to fund No
Labels are likely to have strong opinions on such a choice.
The organization is using a tax law that allows it to keep its
donors secret until it becomes a political party. At the same time, it is trying to qualify as
a party. Maine’s Secretary of State questioned
if it was trying to mislead people. Voters
are asked to give it a political blank check.
Here’s a way to test its politically neutral intentions,
taking it at its word that it backs moderates.
It should support a moderate challenger in the presidential
primaries in each party. The appeal of
both Biden and Trump would be tested. If
both of its preferred candidates won, its work would be done. If only one of them was victorious, No Labels
should throw all of its support to that candidate. If both lost, it would have been proved
wrong.
If No Labels participated in this way, it could still keep
its financial backers secret. But that
secret would discredit a group trying to promote good government.
To counter the sizeable, hard-core support for Trump, No
Labels looks like a crypto plot by traditional GOP business backers to produce a
conservative ticket without Trump. The first step would be to nominate a
traditional GOP conservative or a right-leaning Democrat.
The second step would be to peel away Democrats who think
Biden has caved in to the progressives.
If No Labels ran a renegade Democrat, it could re-elect Trump.
The weakness of this ploy is the reluctance among all but a
few Republicans to take on Trump. They still worry about the ability of his
troops to unseat them. Just look at the silent
Republican “problem solvers.”
At the same time, they ignore the new-found unity of the Democrats. Across the spectrum, they like Biden, even if
some grumble. Almost all accept him as
their leader and understand they must remain unified to have a realistic chance
of governing.
In the end, the presidential election could well be all about
Trump, and No Labels can do little about that.
No comments:
Post a Comment