Even in an election year which always features the fewest races and draws the least interest – the one following a presidential election – it is no secret that the American electorate is fed up and displeased with their choices. This is obviously apparent in Virginia, with its thankfully almost-over, mudslinging, down and dirty gubernatorial race. So the question arises: is voter disgust just a small case of the sniffles or a full-blown electoral flu?
Without a doubt, those who have had it with the country’s current political leadership are in huge majorities. Congressional approval sunk as low as 5% during the government shutdown (before “rising” to its current average of just over 10%), and Obama’s approval numbers are on par with the last days of George W. Bush.
So with two major party candidates in Virginia that have met with widespread dissatisfaction, and Republicans and Democrats as unpopular as ever nationally, is this finally the moment when a third party could actually rise and become a force? We’re not talking about a personality-based candidacy (e.g. George Wallace, Ross Perot or Ralph Nader) but a party organized around a coherent school of thought. The Libertarians or Greens are the obvious ones that come to mind.
The answer is the same as it has been seemingly in perpetuity: an emphatic no.
There are simply no trending numbers nationally or regionally in the direction of a third party. Libertarian registrations are not massively on the rise – nor is there a stampede to the Green Party. And yet Republicans in Virginia are having conniptions over the candidacy of Robert Sarvis. He is drawing 8-10 percent in the polls, and the rancor between Republicans and those defecting to the Sarvis camp is beginning to smell like a dumpster on a hot summer’s day.
True or not, Republicans believe the lion’s share of the Sarvis vote is coming from their quarters. And so to them, Sarvis is no longer a true and honest candidate – he is simply a spoiler of the worst sort. In his most recent column, George Will recounts that third parties are like bees – they sting, and then they die. In Virginia, there is no evidence contradicting that conventional wisdom. Nevertheless, there is gnashing of teeth as Commonwealth Republicans try in vain to remove a nasty bee from their bonnet.
According to the latest Washington Post poll, 64% of likely McAuliffe voters said they were voting against Cuccinelli rather than for McAuliffe. With 44% of Cuccinelli likely voters saying they are voting against McAuliffe rather than for Cuccinelli, that adds up to 56% of likely voters who will cast a vote not for one of the major candidates, but against another, or for a third party.
While it is difficult to believe the results of some polls indicating Sarvis’s support is drawn equally from Republicans and Democrats, given his message of truly limited government, it may just be that enough voters are simply convinced Cuccinelli and McAuliffe are such poor choices that they want to send a message supporting neither.
Nevertheless, in a race that follows a government shutdown, another trillion dollars added to the debt ceiling, a disastrous rollout of Obamacare, and featuring two unpopular candidates, one would expect a credible third party candidate to get serious traction. But Sarvis is at best barely into double digits.
Will Sarvis’ candidacy determine the outcome of this race? Perhaps. McAuliffe is leading Cuccinelli by an average of close to ten points in the latest polls (including Wednesday’s Quinnipiac poll showing McAuliffe’s margin at 4%). It might not be surprising to find an ultimate McAuliffe victory at about the margin of support for Sarvis; ergo the GOP argument that if Sarvis were not in the race, it could be a photo finish with Cuccinelli pulling it out. But barring the untimely demise of both major candidates before election day, it is a metaphysical certitude that Sarvis will not come close to being the next governor of Virginia.
Most of the attacks against Cuccinelli have been policy-based, particularly his positions on abortion and contraception, and his statements about homosexuals. And for that reason, Libertarians may indeed have votes and voters to gain – but not in large numbers – from those who don’t like Cuccinelli’s social agenda but would not vote for McAuliffe’s tax and spend policies.
While there are certainly some attacks against McAuliffe’s would-be public policies, most of the criticism against him has been based on his odious schemes to fatten his own wallet. Thus, absent an unrelenting parade of similarly ethically challenged candidates, Virginia Democrats do not have to worry about an exodus lasting beyond this cycle.
Historically, third parties have not fared well in American politics, with the exception of short-term protest/breakaway parties like the Dixiecrats of 1948. When is the last time you heard about the Socialist Workers party, the Anti-Masonic party, or my personal favorite, the Know Nothing party? Unless and until we are serious about changing the way parties are given permission to operate (a subject for another day), your support of anyone without an R or D after their name will still amount to nothing more than a protest vote.
