Here is a small thought that arose from the big firing at CNN.
Shifts in personal fortune and unexpected turns remind us of what we know in the abstract and forget in the particular. They remind us that life is not, as a friend once reflected, a painting. In a painting the curtain doesn’t move. In life it moves, often softly but sometimes, in a storm, wildly.
They remind us of rise and fall. Life is dynamic—fate, chance and character play big, determinative roles. We go through the daily grind thinking nothing ever changes, but life is change. Sometimes it’s barely perceptible; sometimes it goes boom.
“Expect the unexpected.” That was the attitudinal advice of the veteran newsman Harrison Salisbury to the young then joining his profession. Born in 1908, he’d covered World War II, Moscow after the war, Vietnam. You have to hold your mind open to the constant possibility of sharp turns.
As this is written, Donald Trump is said to be a target of a criminal investigation by the Justice Department. We don’t know how broad or persuasive any charging document would be, how soon an indictment might be handed up. We don’t know if any information released might leave a Trump-inclined voter saying, “That’s it, I’m done.” Or if an indictment would increase Mr. Trump’s popularity, as legal charges have in the past.
Mr. Trump may be sailing unimpeded to the Republican nomination. He may be cruisin’ for a bruisin’.
But here is the potential political surprise that is on my mind. For months people have been talking about a serious third party entering the 2024 presidential race. I believe that if the major party nominees are Joe Biden and Mr. Trump—but only if they are—a third party will certainly enter the race and put up candidates for president and vice president. And if a few crucial things break its way—they have to get on almost every state ballot; and put forward a solid ticket, not a brilliant one but solid, two accomplished people, one from each party, presumably political veterans, whom people could see, hear, and think they could do the job—they’d have an even or better than even chance of surprising history by winning.
If they can do those two difficult things, and avoid scandal and total incompetence, they could do it. I don’t know other people who think this, but I do.
The biggest political group in America isn’t Democrats or Republicans; it is the unaffiliated. Gallup, which does a monthly poll on political affiliation, reports a record number of Americans say they are politically independent. In March Gallup put the share of independents at 49%—pretty much the same as the two parties put together. A Gallup analyst told Axios that while it’s not unusual for the young to declare themselves independent more than the old, it is unusual that as Gen X and Millenials get older they seem to be staying independent and not joining a party, possibly out of aversion to a perceived stigma of partisanship.
An NBC poll in April reported 70% of voters don’t want Mr. Biden to run for re-election, and 60% don’t want Mr. Trump to run again. It said about half of Democrats don’t want Mr. Biden. An AP-NORC poll found 44% of Republicans don’t want Mr. Trump as their nominee.
These are huge numbers, and if you believe them—they roughly comport with my observations, so I do—then the predicates for a successful third party are there.
But here’s where my mind always goes: Ross Perot launched his independent presidential bid in 1992, when America was a more normal country, one that colored more within the lines, and not as furious and polarized as now. Even then certain fault lines were emerging—on trade, globalism, and the growing distance between elite perceptions of what was real and important, and those of common folk. Perot was a business visionary, the founder of a great company, Electronic Data Systems. He was public-spirited and blunt-talking. In June 1992 he was leading both George Bush and Bill Clinton. But his campaign was hapless and gaffe-filled, and he was unpredictable. He dropped out of the race, re-entered in the fall, said operatives were trying to spy on him, and by the end it was pretty much out there that Ross Perot was slightly crazy.
Even with all that, Perot got almost 20% of the vote. Twenty percent when they thought he might be a little nuts. With that in mind I can quite imagine a competent third party now getting 35% of the vote to the other guys’ 32% and 33%, say. What would happen then? Most likely, no candidate would receive a sufficient Electoral College vote. The election would go to the House, causing uncertainty that would at some point be resolved. It would be real edge-of-the-seat stuff in a nation that already has too much edge-of-the-seat stuff, but also seems to like it.
The group No Labels has so far got a third party on five ballots. A spokesman said it hopes to be on 29 by the end of the year and 34 not long after. No Labels plans to hold a convention in April in Dallas to announce a ticket, and final ballot efforts will be led by the nominees. So far, state to state, it’s been hand to hand. Democrats and their aligned groups see a third party as an existential threat. Trump people aren’t in the game yet, but if and when Mr. Trump seems assured of the GOP nomination they likely will be. It’s unknown and unclear which party would lose most through a third party challenge. My guess: both more or less evenly.
Third-party supporters always have a reputation as political dilettantes—affluent people with too much time on their hands. They’re slammed as unrealistic, the kind of people who’d order off-menu at a bad restaurant and assume for some reason the food will be better. Actually in the past when thinking about them I’ve been reminded of what JFK said, musingly, about businessmen and union leaders. Business executives he met with were well-educated, culturally conversant, sophisticated—but strangely clueless about politics. Union leaders were unlettered and crude but knew everything about politics, down to the precinct level.
Third-party people like to get together and fantasize about their dream ticket. They should be hyperfocused instead on getting on ballots. And they should stop seeing themselves as the world sees them, nice dreamy centrists. They should take themselves and their position more seriously.
It will be hard to get the ticket right. Why not just throw the question open to a convention? Because you probably want seasoned and attractive political veterans as your nominees, but the moment prospective candidates come forward they’re dead within their own party. They’ll probably put themselves forward only if a nomination is sure.
A lot has to be done right to make a third party real. But I don’t know why people dismiss the idea. Life is surprise. In life the curtain moves, and in a storm it moves wildly.