Sorry Messrs. Bloomberg, Broder — there’s no 3rd-party clamoring

One need not look too hard to find a “moderate” pundit projecting his or her own desire for a third-party presidential campaign onto the public. This became especially fashionable a couple of weeks ago, when NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and a bipartisan group of allies chatted in Oklahoma about some kind of independent bid. (Unity08 effectively closed its doors to concentrate on its Bloomberg-backing efforts.)

The David Broders of the world argue that most Americans, reasonable and in the center, are fed up with Democrats and Republicans, and are clamoring for someone new to step up and challenge the two parties. It sounds nice, but it’s not true. A new Gallup poll offers some interesting data:

[R]ecent Gallup polling has assessed some of the public’s attitudes that could be related to the ultimate success of an independent or third-party candidate running against the two major-party candidates this year. The data show that Americans are quite positive about the candidates running for president so far, and believe they have suggested good solutions to the nation’s problems, marking a sharp contrast with what these same measures showed in early 1992. Thus, while dissatisfaction in general is high, the American public does not appear to believe it is important or necessary for an independent candidate outside of the traditional two major parties to step into the race in order to save the nation.

Gallup asked, for example, “Is there any candidate running this year that you think would make a good president, or not?” At this point in the 1992 campaign, only 40% saw a good president among the candidates. In 1996, it was 57%. In March 2000, the number was 71%. Now, it’s 84%.

That’s pretty one-sided. In fact, 84% of Americans don’t agree on much, but they’re looking at the fields of presidential candidates and seem pretty satisfied.

Gallup also asked, “Are the presidential candidates talking about issues you really care about, or not?” Not only did 72% of Americans say “yes,” the numbers, 11 months before the campaign, are already “almost as high as it has been in October of previous election years — a time when positive responses to these types of questions usually rise.”

Finally, Gallup asked, “Do you feel that any of the presidential candidates have come up with good ideas for solving the country’s problems, or not?” 58% said the candidates have, and while that may sound low compared to the responses to the other questions, the pollster noted the majority is “one of the highest Gallup has ever measured at any point during an election year.”

Gallup’s Frank Newport concluded:

When Perot jumped into the campaign in the spring of 1992, he moved to the top of the national horse-race polls, pulling in more potential voters than either President Bush or Clinton. Perot later left the race and then re-entered it, creating a highly unusual set of campaign dynamics, but ended up gaining 19% of the 1992 popular presidential vote.

The data reviewed above suggest that the environment would not be nearly as propitious this year as it was for Perot that year. It is true that Americans are broadly dissatisfied this year with both the state of the nation and the economy, as they were in 1992. But Americans at this juncture seem much more willing to say that the current crop of candidates running in the major parties have discussed good solutions to the nation’s problems and, as a result, there is a high level of satisfaction with those currently running.

Sorry, David Broder and the Unity08 gang; Americans generally don’t seem to be where you want them to be.

Shorter version of right-winger: If you’re fed up with Republicans, vote for… a Republican!

  • Again, if Senator Clinton becomes the Democratic nominee as a result of the dishonesty and hypocrisy coming out of her campaign, then I (and I suspect others) would give another viable Progressive candidate serious consideration. The Clinton’s aren’t expanding the Democratic base; they’re shrinking it.

    Mayor Bloomberg Tackles Poverty

  • “most Americans, reasonable and in the center, are fed up with Democrats and Republicans”

    Yes and no. Most Americans are fed up with Republicans acting like drunken trustfunders out for a joy ride with daddy’s sports car and not caring what they hit with it and tired of Democrats not taking a firmer stance in opposition to the silliness Republicans have been up to. Americans are tired of watching this political Wizard of Oz and hoping the Republicans get a brain and the Democrats get some bravery.

  • More importantly, I think that 2000 really rings in people’s minds about how those minor, ‘harmless’ third-party candidates really can swing an election– and against the predominant leanings of the electorate which voted for them.

    Frankly, unless we adopt run-offs as a system (wherein, if no candidate gets more than 50% of the vote, the top two vote-getters hold a run-off), I don’t see any third-party candidate gaining much traction anymore.

  • Supporting my charge of hypocrisy in comment No. 2 above — here’s the evidence (it bears repeating for those who missed it).

    From HillaryClinton.com:

    She must break recent tradition, cast cronyism aside and fill her cabinet with the best people, not only the best Democrats, but the best Republicans as well.. We’re confident she will do that. Her list of favorite presidents – Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, George H.W. Bush and Reagan – demonstrates how she thinks.

    http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=4674

    Her list of favorite presidents demonstrates how she thinks? Indeed.

  • When the nation shifts to the Right, Republicans claim that the nation wants Republican rule.

    When the nation shifts to the Left, Republicans claim that the nation doesn’t know what it wants, there’s uncertainty, turmoil, unanswered questions…that could be answered by a current or former Republican willing to run as an indie.

    OK, I get it now. Thanks.

  • Let’s see what people have to say closer to the general election. Americans have consistently said in polls that they want more choices at the polling booth. Americans consistently say in polls that they want to see independent and third party candidates in presidential debates. They want to hear about a wider range of ideas and proposals, not a narrower range.

    Forget about specific people as candidates for a specific office, what do Americans want in terms of their political system? Again, polls show that an increasing number of people are fed up with the two-party system and 50% or so vote with their feet by staying home. A ridiculous number of races for US House, state senate, and state house across the country go uncontested year after year. That means one-party districts by default all over America. How do we get more people interested in participating in their own democracy so that it becomes robust and self-renewing, so that we don’t have the insomnia-inducing phenomenon of uncontested down-ticket races on ballot after ballot? That is the relevant question, it seems to me, rather than the personality-driven, celebrity-driven popularity contests to which polls like the one referenced in this post refer.

  • With Thompson’s withdrawal and Paul’s small but fervent supporters, most likely there will be a 3rd party attempt from the right. If it gains traction it could come close to putting Rs in 3rd place. Especially, if a certain candidate becomes the nominee and pictures of him embracing the surge are distributed widely enough.

  • I agree that the public is fed up with Republicans and Democrats for very different reasons. If the Dems would grow a spine they’d be more popular. If the Rs would be less evil they’d be (sorry, can’t keep a straight face on that one).

    I wish they’d ask people whether the next president is likely to be a better one than GWB. I’ll bet they’d get 90%.

    and Steve, the article you pointed to doesn’t link to the poll data, here it is:

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/tables/live/2008-01-16-poll.htm

  • You know, I would give these guys more respect if they would just honestly tell the world what they think—that they want their republican party back from the crazies who have highjacked it. Instead, they dance around this ‘third party’ and ‘unity’ crap, like anyone who is politically atune can’t figure that out. But a very large segment of the voting public is politically tone-deaf, so who knows.

  • The liberal media can always demonstrate its objectivity by hating the leading Democrat and finding that the Republican, policy aside, “connects” with average Joes (i.e., rubes). Broder is far happier being able to discuss why Republicans “connect”, and, like all reporters, finds speaking good of a Democrat an anathema. So, faced with such an obvious and unavoidable failure of Republican leadership, Broder may have had to suck up the fact that they ain’t too popular right now, but to therefore side with the Democrats is just too much to stomach.

    You can violate the first rule of centrist punditry, which is if you can’t say anything nice about the GOP, don’t say anything at all, but you can’t expect them to violate the second: Never speak well of a leading Democrat, unless they are saying nice things about Republicans. Once you scrap both, then centrist punditry ceases to exist.

  • David Gaines @ 7

    I don’t doubt what you are saying, but there are two problems in practice.

    First, people say a lot of happy things in polls and their actions (intentionally or not; consciously or not) belie their words – people say they hate negative campaigning, yet time after time political practitioners and pollsters can show that negative campaigning works. If people really dont like it, all they have to do is quit responding and it will go away. Similarly, people don’t take the basic actions to improve their political system – they don’t participate at the local level where the scale is such that they can make real change, they don’t contribute to entities like Common Cause who try to clean up the system, they can’t even bother to take responsibility to be modestly informed (what percent still think we found WMD in Iraq or believe Obama is a Muslim?)

    Second, and this may in some part explain the paragraph above, it is not as easy as just wishing additional choices into existence. The current political and governing system in the US has a massive two-party intertia built in. This ranges from the simple notion of people favoring what they know or having been raised as a D or an R, to winner-take-all electoral votes that make a multiplicity of parties much less practical than in a proportional system, to complicated ballot access and campaign finance rules that require large “market shares” in prior races or allow soft money to parties – defined in a way that only covers D and R, to “pipeline filling” state positions on boards and commissions that specify a certain number of Ds and Rs – with no provision for anyone else.

    It will be a long time and a hard fight to have any truly viable action outside of Ds and Rs. Much, much easier to work within the framework to change the Ds and Rs to better fit the peoples’ needs.

  • David Gaines @ #7 –

    I think you missed the point of the poll referenced in this post. The poll was specifically about general satisfaction with the candidate choices currently available in this election (which at this point is essentially Democrats and Republicans only). No candidate names were included. In theory I would love to have the option of viable third party candidates, but our political system as designed isn’t favorable to them and Nader 2000 killed the possibility for the foreseeable future, at least among liberals.

    On another topic, two encouraging results for Democrats if you look at the results of questions 2 and 3 at USA Today as referenced by RacerX at #9, measuring the level of enthusiasm for voting this year. In previous years, the level of enthusiasm of Dems and Reps was consistently quite similar. This year Democrats are substantially more enthusiastic. Not especially surprising, but it’s nice to see even more confirmation of this. The poll doesn’t show a partisan breakdown of enthusiasm for the candidates, but I suspect they would show a similar result.

  • But, Broderville demands that they be listened to. The good of the cocktail weenie circuit nation demands it.

  • Comments are closed.