Step on up, centrists

Yesterday I came across an interesting article (http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daniel-gross/tom-friedman-time-third-political-party-201823240.html), and in it was New York Times columnist Tom Friedman arguing now could be the time for a viable third party candidate for the White House in 2016. Friedman argued there's a hole in the middle of American politics and all it would take is a credible independent candidate to make a run. He argued that the right candidate could take 30 to 40 percent of the country.  Not quite majority, but enough plurality for an election to the White House.

I don't think he's too far off. If voters are generally dissatisfied with the candidates both major parties offer, a good chunk of voters could call the bluff of Democratic and Republican candidates and elect a different option. Minnesota did just that in 1998 when then-Reform Party candidate Jesse Ventura "shocked the world" by defeating Republican Norm Coleman and Democrat Skip Humphrey. Ventura could be described as someone who, at the time, was described as fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

But at the same time, many issues remain for a viable third party candidate to become elected - as pointed out by the article's author Daniel Gross. First, it is hard for centrists to lay equal blame on the both major parties without taking a clear stance of their own. I doubt you'd find a centrist today taking the path Ventura took by advocating taxing churches for extra income and legalizing prostitution. They're definitely not mainstream, but at least he was honest.

A bigger issue is organization and money. Elections are expensive and tough to win, and it takes a strong national party to help build a foundation for candidates to run with. Democrats and Republicans, believe it or not, have that because they're able to gain support from groups like MoveOn on the left and the Tea Party on the right. The same can't be said about the National Independence Party. I mean, can you think of any centrist extremists out there?

There's also the issue that they take away votes away from the two major parties. And while I'll concede there is some truth to that, both parties are equally capable of taking away votes from each other based on their actions and own words. Just ask then-Democratic candidate Mike Hatch why he lost to then-Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty in 2006 - a year where Democrats swept a number of elections around the country?

So unless you're Ralph Nader, you don't run for the White House just to get your name in the press and eventually sell some books. You run to win. And don't forget that whoever wins the election will typically win with a plurality vote (the highest percentage under 50 percent) and still face the same issues in one term before they run for reelection.

Sadly, the only way an independent candidate could make it possible for victory is if he or she self-finances their campaign - especially in 2012. Other than New York City Michael Bloomberg, I don't know any centrist-minded billionaires who enjoy politics and would be willing to step in and go to bat for their country.