Let them Debate: The Barr/Nader Factor

(Lafayette, California)

 

    I had the great honor of speaking to the Lafayette Rotary Club this week about Campaign 2008.  Every year I speak to more than 25 Rotary Clubs around the Bay Area. These are folks committed to community service and are true leaders. How Rotary has served around the world for over 100 years, especially its effort to eradicate Polio, is remarkable. Roto-plast and other great programs have treated thousands with birth defects, too. It's a wonderful group of kind, generous people.

 

    Of course, the Rotarians had lots of questions about this year's Presidential campaign; and since I had been on the campaign trail from January through June, there was a lot to discuss.

 

    One Rotarian asked me about the viability of third-party candidates and whether I think there should be third-party candidates in the debates. GREAT question, and one I love to talk about.

 

    An Associated Press poll in June had it:

 

    Obama   47%

    McCain   43%

    Nader       6%

 

    A Zogby Poll in early July had it:

 

    Obama 44%

    McCain   38%

    Barr        6%

 

    I have always believed that a Democracy is simply a "marketplace of ideas." If you put an idea (or candidate) forward, and get the majority to support it, you may prevail. It's not a guarantee, but it has worked well in this country for more than 230 years.

 

    I am a supporter of a viable third option. In 1992, Ross Perot garnered 19 percent of the popular vote. In 1998, pro-wrestler-turned-Mayor Jesse Ventura won the Governor's race in Minnesota. While I did not support either, I do support people having a choice. In 1980, I liked John Anderson; and he got my vote.

 

    My point is....choice! We have nothing to lose by looking at all options. With that in mind, I believe that if any candidates are polling above 5 percent, let them participate in the fall debates. In 1980, there was great turmoil over whether to include John Anderson. The same goes for 1992 and Ross Perot. How about Pat Buchanan in 1996 and Ralph Nader in 2000?

 

    Oh, I know the arguments: Conservatives believe Ross Perot cost George H.W. Bush reelection in 1992; and liberals blame Ralph Nader for Al Gore's defeat in 2000. They argue that the third-party candidates should not have run because they pulled from Democratic and Republican Party constituencies.

 

    That's crazy! A candidate's choice should be on whether they attract votes, not whether they draw votes away from another person. This year, Republican Ron Paul was polling 10% in the New Hampshire primary, yet Fox News Channel blocked him from the debate. Why? Are we that afraid of new and different ideas? Don't we trust ourselves to reject ideas that might not work?

This year is interesting, as Libertarian Bob Barr may pull votes from John McCain. Independent Ralph Nader and the Green Party's Cynthia McKinney may pull votes from liberals. Maybe they will just cancel each other out.

Who knows? We'll never know if the corporate media and major parties "systematically" lock them out by not given them serious coverage, or by not giving them a place on the stage. Let's make it a policy: If any third party candidate is polling better than 5% on Labor Day, let them join McCain and Obama in the fall debates.

What's the harm? After all, this IS a Democracy!

I am busy getting ready for the Democratic Convention in Denver and the Republican Convention in St.Paul. Check in often at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.