From the wild corners of the internet - Why calls for a third party fall flat

We need a third party candidate! We need a third party!

>>crickets<<

Stalking the wooly fringes of the internet are articles like this from Thomas Molitor who writes at NMPolitics.net. He posits that the voters want a new candidate and a new party because two policy ideas are missing from the current political debate: An reformed money system, and a flat tax. I could go into a long discussion that these two ideas are missing from mainstream political debate for a reason: they are really, really bad ideas.

However, the issue I would like to discuss is what it would take to have a robust multi-party system.

What would it take? I am asking you, my tens and tens of readers. Comment and let me know.

My belief is that it would take three things: Money, votes, and for people to do more than just wish for a third party or third party candidate.

In nearly every partisan race for office across the nation, from city council, to state legislature, to Congress, and the presidency, there are more than just Republican and Democratic Party candidates. Just look a bit farther down the ballot, and by golly, there they are! So, the extra choices are there. What's missing?

Money and votes - that's what's missing. Running for office, even a small race in a geographically limited area takes money. To raise the money, you need an organized group of people who can build a donor base. The vast majority of third party candidates are missing this piece of the puzzle. Many are so uncomfortable about asking for money, or so head-in-the-clouds, that they think money doesn't matter and should not even be discussed. This is one of the main reasons they do not, and cannot win, an election.

Votes, in the end, are what it takes to get a candidate and their party into power. The responsibility rests on two parties: the voter, and the candidate. Voters say they want third party candidates, and third parties. Well, I can say I want a unicorn, but that isn't going to make one spring into existence. When it comes down to the actual casting of their vote, the vast majority of voters chicken out and vote for either a Republican or Democratic candidate. Why? The reasons are myriad, but the two main comments are: "I don't want to help the candidate I really oppose" (this is the spoiler argument), or, "I want to vote for a winning candidate." Vast articles have been published on why both of these are crap reasons to vote for a major-party candidate, so I will skip the discussion here. The responsibility of the candidate is to give the voters a compelling reason to vote for them. Hint: a compelling reason is not "hey, I'm not a democrat or a republican." The candidate must mount a campaign that is relevant to the race they are campaigning in. Why do I say this? In 2004, a Socialist Workers Party candidate ran for mayor of a mid-western city on a policy of reforming our relations with Cuba. Um.....what? An interesting issue, but one that has near zero saliency in that particular race. A campaign, based on clearly articulated values, and built around issues relevant to the campaign is the only want to actually get a meaningful number of vote. Does this mean the candidate has to talk about exactly the same thing in exactly the same way the two major-party candidates do? No. In face, differentiation is important.

If you are a voter, stop and seriously consider if you really want more than two parties or not, and what you might be willing to do to make that happen. You can give money, you can give your vote, you can do both, or just one or the other. But, you must do one of these things, or you will not get what you claim to want. It's really that simple.

If you are a third-party candidate, stop and seriously consider what you are really doing. Are you running a campaign to make yourself feel good about an issue? Or, are you running a serious campaign that is focussed on winning the election, or at least building credibility for yourself and the party which could help win future elections? If not, you may be technically running for office, but your words and actions are completely irrelevant, and those people who choose to give their funds and votes to you are wasting their resources.

Thanks for reading, and your comments are welcome!

--

Daryl Northrop

Election Dynamics Part 3: Putting it all together

As promised, this is part three, the final installment in the Election Dynamics entries. This somewhat rambling set of posts has been designed to help potential Green Party candidates think about elections in an organized and strategic manner - why are you running, where will you run, what type of office, what are the tools and techniques that can be used?

This last installment will be focussed on your incumbent and the race you running in.

Starting with the last first - the race you are running in. What is the best race for you to run in, as a Green Party member? That depends on many things, but most importantly - your interests, your ability to devote time/energy/resources to the campaign, and your incumbent(s),

What are your interests? Are they focused towards social justice, the economy, environmentalism, or something else? The issues and values you focus on in your race should be of great interest and passion to you. This translates in to something the voters can feel, and understand. Even if you are the area's biggest authority on transportation issues, if you sound bored with the subject and the values behind it, the voters will tune out on this. They will hear the message that you do not have the energy, and that you may not even care about the ideas you are trying to advance. Monitor the news, the opinion pages, blogs, and other media for hot issues in your race. If some or all of these issues coincide with issues you are excited and passionate about - seriously consider addressing them in your campaign.

What amount of time/energy/resources can you devote to the campaign: A good rule of thumb is - the smaller the amounts of each, the smaller your district should be that you are campaigning in. Continuing along that line of thought, at a certain point you will have to ask - "Am I able to give enough to have a chance of achieving my goal(s)?" Be honest with yourself, the people you have gathered to help you, and the Green Party organizing you are working with. It is better to delay running for office until the next cycle so you can do it right vs running a weak, poorly managed campaign that you cannot be fully engaged in. You can never devote too much time to your race, but think carefully when considering if you can devote enough.

The incumbent. This is what it comes down to - you have to defeat someone to win office. It may be an entrenched incumbent, it may be a field of other candidates if the encumbent is term-limted out of running again. But it will be you against someone else. The first rule of combat is Know Your Enemy. While that may be a bit much when it comes to politics, you will need to know your opponent as well as they know themselves. Their voting record, fundraising, professional history, educational history, public records, published articles, speeches. Their own record, action, and words can speak volumes about them, and against them. Now, I am not advocating for negative campaigning or a spree of attack ads. But, proper research on the incumbent is essential in knowing where they are weak on issues and values, and where you can show your strength. For example: if your incumbent takes massive donations from corporate special interests, and you do not (and you BETTER NOT as a Green Party candidate) - you have the opportunity to relentlessly and honestly hammer the point that your incumbent is more concerned with representing the wealthy and powerful then the regular folks of the district.

A note of caution: If you start to gain momentum in a race, and start to look like a contender for victory, you will be attacked (especially if running against an entrenched incumbent). So, look into that closet of yours and see what skeletons might be in there. Not a pretty thing to think about, but it can happen. On the upside, if you are being attacked, that means you are doing something right, so do not let up on your opponent!

Once you have done your research on your opponent, you can contruct a message grid which will help guide you in putting together a cohesive set of messages. I message grid has four quadrants:

1. You on you: These are messages that your campaign will advance about you, your values, your issues, and your ideas.
2. You on them: These are messages that your campaign will advance about your opponent. Again, this is not automatically negative campaigning, but highlighting of differences to your advantage.
3. Them on them: This is what the opponents campaign will say about themselves- their ideas, values, voting history, accomplishments, etc
4. Them on you: If they start talking about you/attacking you, these are message that they will use. Do not go easy on yourself. Have your meanest, snarkiest friend play the role of the opposition and rip into you from a messaging standpoint.

A note on message grids: There are entire books written about messaging and messaging techniques. A message grid is meant to be nothing more than a simple, useful tool, to help you get used to thinking in a multi-dimensional way. Think about big electoral races - both campaigns are constantly: talking about themselves, talking about their opponent, running positive ads, running negative ads, running rebuttals to attack ads run against them, etc. It is very common for some or all of the messaging modes to be running simultaneously.

That wraps up the three part series on election dynamics. I hope you have found it useful, and that it can be a starting point for your own ideas about running for office. Questions, comments, and feedback are always welcome - post those comments, people!

Election Dynamics Part 2: Issues and Goals

This entry is the 2nd part of our 3 part series on Election Dynamics.

The next component of electoral activity is issues and goals of running in an election. These two pieces are the most vital considerations to running for office. A candidates issues must be important to the race they are running in. While this may seem profoundly obvious, it is worth stating for two primary reasons. First, third party candidates, especially those who are highly ideological (intense ideology should be avoided, but that is a separate issue), tend to focus on issues that are often far way from the local or state race they are running in. A prime example of this was from a mayoral race in Des Moines, Iowa in 2002. The candidate for the Socialist Workers Party was primarily concerned about US foreign policy towards Cuba. In a mayoral race. In Des Moines, Iowa. Needless to say, they did not do well, even by third-party standards. Second, individual candidates my have favorite "pet" issues that are not salient to the race they are considering to running in.

Know your issues for the race you are running in.

Sources for learning more about the issues that a race revolves around is to examine the website or reports that are issued by the body that is being elected. Example - if you are running for city council, thoroughly examine the city council minutes and reports for the past several months to a year. This will give a concrete base as to what is being discussed within the elected body. Further research can be done in local news outlets via keyword searches. Another excellent tool is a Google Alert. This is essentially the internet version of a "clipping service" that collects web entries (news, blogs, etc) regarding a particular topic that you specify. Alerts can be set up for issues like "global warming" or for an elected body such as "Detroit Lakes city council."

Do not forget candidate websites from previous campaigns for the office you are targeting. Many are left up for public browsing long after a campaign ends. If the sites are not availabe, the Wayback Machine can be used. This site archives webpages that are no longer active. Some pictures and links may no longer be active, but the text will be available that will show the types of issues that were salient for the race at that time.

What is your goal for running for an office?

Silly question, right? Wrong. Lets look at a video...

So you really do need to have a short, succinct, and compelling reason why you are running for office. This reason is not just for public consumption, but also for you and your supporters. Reasons for running for office might include:

1. Winning!
2. The campaign may be an advertisement for your local, state, or national party
3. Building a campaign organization in order to transform it into a political party once the race is over (assuming one was not there prior)
4. Getting issues or perspectives into the campaign that might otherwise be ignored.

The types of issues you are likely to encounter, and the reasons for why you are running are two areas that a potential candidate needs to examine early on. They will guide research, along with how to craft a campaign strategy that is appropriate not only the race, but for the goals that you set, whether winning, or something else!

Coming soon: Three part series on Election Dynamics

Election dynamics covers a wide range of information, and I am putting together a three part series on election dynamics for Green Party candidates. The aim is to demystify the deciding what race to run in, what the situation is on the ground in your area, how to identify the goal of your race, etc. First section should be up in the next couple of days!

--Daryl Northrop

Arkansas Green Party hosting online/offline candidate training 02-20 to 02-21

Great news from the Arkansas Green Party - they are hosting a two day candidate training school, hosted by Brent McMillan, National Political Director of the Green Party of the United States.

The campaign training will also be streamed live at http://www.livestream.com/greenpartyus

The Green Party is serious about running candidates for elected office. I was privileged to be a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2004, and support from a state party and national party is key.

The news that this event will be streamed over the internet is crucial - running for office is challenging, and takes quite a bit of specialized knowledge. This training can help potential candidates, campaign managers, party political operatives, and others, start to realize what it takes to make a campaign tick. It is not easy work, but it can be a lot of fund, and very rewarding.

Below is a tentative schedule of events. Greens, Independents, and all those curious about campaigning should tune in!

Day One - What every candidate should know

11 am - Introductions, brief orientation, begin workshop.
             Run time approximately three hours plus 10 -15 minute breaks roughly every hour.

3 pm - end session

3:15 pm - 5 pm  - Topic to be announced

5 pm - 6:30  Dinner/ social (on site)

6:30 pm - 8:30 pm - Musical entertainment :
                                  Ken Adler
                                  Still on the Hill

Day Two:

11 am - Messaging

12:15 pm - Working with (and around?) the media

1:30 pm - Fundraising

 2:30 - 3:00 pm - wrap up Q&A

--
Daryl Northrop