08/17/2002 Archived Entry: "Greens, and Unmentioned Others"
Another story about how the Greens are eating away at the Democrats best laid plans for success: Green around the gills. These are good reads, but I have a major complaint with their subjective treatment of reality. Gitell states: The Green Party is poised to dramatically alter the political scene in three states where it is fielding candidates for higher office: Maine, Minnesota, and Massachusetts. However, he doesn't state through the entire article about how there are other 3rd Party candidates in those very states, Michael, Moore, and Howell, whom will probably take as much or more votes away from the Republican Party... do we see them whining about it? Well, yea, over on FreeRepublic they serve plenty of cheese. The fact is that the two-party system which has held a duopoly on power for so long, now seems to be losing it's grip: on the edges the start-up, 3rd-Party groups (Greens, Libertarians, Constitutionalists) are building a national base; and even the center (Independent) is not holding to the Democrats and Republicans.
Replies: 1 Comment
To steal a line from Kermit the Frog, it's not easy being Green. Or, for that matter, Libertarian, Reform, Natural Law, etc. The American electoral system was created by the two major parties, and in most states independents and new parties have a more difficult task getting ballot access.
In addition, the media seems to be wed to the idea that only Democrats and Republicans merit coverage. I don't see that as some great corporate conspiracy, but rather a lack of political knowlege among news directors. Here in Colorado, for example, the Denver Post recently editorialized about the growth of the Green and Libertarian parties. In the same editorial, though, the paper stated that it didn't have the resources to cover minor party candidates. That certainly is a testament to journalistic mediocrity.
In addition to political ignorance and ineptitude, many journalists are simply lazy. I see few good investigative reporters anymore. Most of what passes for journalism today is exemplified by the trash news on cable and the "pretty boy" anchors on the major networks. On the local scene the picture is no better in most cities. For someone like me who grew up in a newspaper family it's a bitter pill.
For a new party to break into the big time it's almost a chicken or egg situation. To win elections they need coverage. To generate coverage they must have a record of electing people to public office. Fortunately, mediums such as the Internet and alternative local newspapers and community radio stations allow independent and minor party candidates some options to the corporate media.
I find the Greens to have a better approach than the Libertarians or other new parties. For the most part the Greens have been concentrating on local offices, building a "farm team" that can run for state and federal positions in the future. While they often field candidates for major offices more often than not the Green action is at City Hall and the County Courthouse.
The Libertarians, on the other hand, scatter-shoot. They try to field candidates for just about every office, even though most of their campaigns either are non-existant or amateurish. They get names on the ballot but fail to bring their issues into the campaign. Often the Libertarian candidates don't even live in the districts in which they have filed. They waste their efforts by not concentrating on races in which they can make a difference or even win.
The problem with many new parties is that they attract dedicated idealists instead of political professionals. The Greens are starting to go beyond issues and are starting to field better candidates and to build local and state party organizations. With the Democrats becoming too oriented to corporate interests and too willing to support Bush on war, the Greens have an excellent opportunity to emerge as a viable liberal alternative.
Posted by Colorado Pundit @ 08/19/2002 08:23 PM PST
