Third Party Irony
The marginalized third party would become the Democratic Party.
By Hank Edson
Pulling a Lieberman 
Ralph Nader was right, sort of. He did say, after all, that Democratic Party politicians had no reason to listen to the voters on the left whose vote they regarded as “in the bank.” Well, they are not listening.
Roughly 70% of democrat voters now favor impeachment, but the democrats in the House of Representatives aren’t budging. We want our troops home, but the “surge” continues. As a result of the Democrat’s betrayal of their mid-term victory, the woman in charge, Nancy Pelosi, is being challenged for her seat by Cindy Sheehan as an independent.
It may be different to run a third party campaign for president than to run one against the Speaker of the House of Representatives, but this distinction should not drown out the obvious truth: we cannot rely on the lesser evil as a solution for the greater one.
Somewhere Ralph Nader is buying a Sheehan for Congress t-shirt with, “I told you so,” written on the back.
If we listened to Nader’s critics, we would rail against Cindy Sheehan for not running within the Democratic Party for the party’s nomination. Of course, that’s what Ned Lamont did in his effort to unseat Pro-War former democratic vice-Presidential nominee, Joe Lieberman, in the last election cycle. And see, Nader’s critics were right: you can change the party from within: Lamont actually won the primary.
Success?
Wrong. Armed with corporate cash, Lieberman simply declared himself an independent candidate and won the senatorial election anyway. All the while, democrats in office were careful not to condemn Lieberman’s flight from the party. No one objected that, as a result of his lack of commitment to the Democratic Party, a candidate won the election who did not represent the will of the party base on the most important issue in the election—the war.
Just imagine that Sheehan had decided to challenge Pelosi for the democratic nomination and then won it. Would she also pull a Lieberman? Had Sheehan chosen to run as a democrat, would anyone have asked: “Say, Madame Speaker, out of respect for the voters in the democratic party that has served you so well in so many ways, will you promise not to run as an independent if Cindy Sheehan wins the democratic primary for your seat?”
The Democratic Party had better come up with a position on how it feels when its incumbents defeated in the party primary use their corporate cash to pull a Lieberman as an independent.
It makes no sense crying about Nader when you make no party loyalty policy after Lieberman.
If a candidate is able to avoid being punished for disregarding the overwhelming will of her party’s voters by amassing treasure chests of corporate donations and running as an independent after losing her party’s primary, the level of corruption in the system will not change, but only evolve more sophisticated means of ignoring the voter’s will. Is this what the Democratic Party wants?
So that’s the first irony: corrupt insiders long established in the Democratic Party are allowed to run third party campaigns without criticism but progressive outsiders like Nader are tarred and feathered for it.
The Education of Al Gore
The second irony flows from the fact that, in sharp contrast to Lieberman’s campaign, Nader’s campaign did advance the integrity of the political process. Just consider, for example, how much Al Gore has improved as a leader since he lost the election. He has started listening again—at least to his own heart and conscience. He should thank Ralph Nader for that.
We must admit, furthermore, that as bad as George W. Bush’s presidency has been in the short run (which is going to drag on long into the future), Nader is the only one to seriously challenge the corruption of the system that made Bush’s rise to power possible.
We should also realize by now that many things, including Nader, were responsible for Bush’s success (like election theft, an inadequate campaign by the Democratic Party, and a corrupt campaign finance system).
And finally we should acknowledge that Nader’s analysis was correct and that it has long-term value if we are ever prepared to accept it. Even if we don’t accept it, it has changed us just as it has changed Al Gore—for the better.
So here is the third and most delicious third party irony I have been relishing: Wouldn’t 
it be great if Al Gore ran for president as a third party candidate!
Wouldn’t the irony be too incredibly rich: wooden, calculated Al Gore reformed and raised to a truly presidential bearing in 2008 by virtue of the type of third campaign everyone claims cost him the presidency in 2000!
Rules for the Draft
After all, we can learn from Nader’s mistakes and say upfront he will bow out of the race if by a certain date he has fewer votes than the democratic nominee.
Why don’t we just maintain a constant-running poll of the American voter’s preference with Al Gore as a third party candidate? He doesn’t have to run or agree to run. He already has the credentials and he has already said more about his vision for America than all the other candidates combined. If the public is given the chance to weigh their vote with Al Gore in the race as an independent candidate, he might soon lead all other candidates.
Then it would be Hillary Clinton's turn to bow out gracefully to ensure that Rudy Giuliani did not become president. Then we could all cry: "Hillary, don't pull a Nader!”
The marginalized third party would thus become the Democratic Party.
This is the reality toward which our spineless Democratic Party is driving the people. We want a man who isn't even running more than anyone the Democratic Party can muster—even after suffering a Republican administration widely judged the worst in history.
A July 2, 2007 poll found Gore would win the New Hampshire Democratic Party primary if it were held that day and he was a candidate for the party’s nomination. Nationwide, he is running third for the nomination without spending a penny and with frequent declarations that he is not a candidate. What does this say about the leadership of Hillary and Obama?
Many people do not consider voting for Gore because they assume he won’t be an available choice if he doesn’t start actively campaigning against Clinton for the nomination. As a third party candidate, he is an available choice on the ballot and it’s a long way away from Election Day. The American people are going to get mighty tired of the careful posturing and obscene expense that are the campaigns of the Democratic Party contenders.
If Nader was right in 2000 that the system was broken and the Democratic Party was not capable of mounting an honest challenge to the corporate interests that conflict with democratic party values, have not the last six-plus years proven him absolutely right? Has not Hillary Clinton proven Nader right?
If our Democratic Party refuses to pull our troops out of Iraq and institute impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney, even though democratic party voters overwhelmingly are demanding they do so, is it not more clear than ever that electing a president from the Democratic Party will only forestall any serious effort to fix our broken democracy for yet four more years?
I say the “draft Al Gore for 2008” campaign needs to run Gore as a third party candidate. It needs to legitimize the idea in the public mind with constant polling. And it needs to establish in advance a date before the actual election day when either the Democratic Nominee or Gore will bow out of the contest depending on which candidate has the strongest showing in the polls. On that day, it just might be Gore who remains in the race. Let him say then that he is not a candidate.
Al Gore as a Third Party President! He could say thank you for the integrity and wisdom he has developed over the last six years by choosing Ralph Nader to be his vice president!
Copyright © by Hank Edson 2007