Skip to main content

OldSpeak

Election 2004: Who Are the Presidential Candidates and Where do They Stand?

By Neal Shaffer
June 01, 2004

The heavily frontloaded Democratic primary process has worked its intended magic. With still two months to go before Kerry formally receives his nomination, and three months before Bush gets his, the election season has all but ground to a halt. The presumptive candidates are crisscrossing the nation like two centipedes, saying nothing new and disagreeing only on the finer points. This will evolve as the real news starts to pick up, but the meantime finds concerned observers wondering just what to make of the choice. Now, then, is a pertinent time to step back and assess not only where the two giants stand but also to point out that they are not exactly alone. It's obvious that, come November, the victor will be either John Kerry or George Bush. There is a lot riding on that choice, but the candidates themselves are less than exciting. Bush continues to dip in the polls as the situation in Iraq grows worse, but Kerry has not received a correlating bounce. The country remains as it has been for some time: deeply divided at a roughly even ratio with a group of undecideds hovering at 5-10 percent. Now is the time for such things, though, and there is every reason to believe that a lot will change between now and November 2nd. Just what form those changes take could depend on the handful of independent and third party candidates also vying for the job. When voters who are not passionate about one man or the other go to the polls they will, in fact, have options. Many of them are likely to exercise one of those options, whether out of frustration, protest, or something more nebulous. Among the partisans there are many who patently dismiss the idea of voting for a candidate with no chance to win. Fair enough, but there is something dangerous about the notion that voters are obligated to foreswear their right to choose. What follows is an attempt to help make that choice a more informed one.

 

THE NADER QUESTION
Any talk of independent and third party candidates in the 2004 elections must start and end with Ralph Nader. His effect on the 2000 race will never cease to be a matter of debate, and that debate will only intensify if he proves to have a similar impact this year. In addressing that potential we are also addressing the status of two of America's largest third parties: the Green Party and the Reform Party. When Ralph Nader ran for president in 2000 (and also in 1996) it was under the aegis of the Greens, and the Green Party's status as a national entity is due in large part to Nader's prominence. When he initially declined to run this year as a Green there was speculation that he had decided to sit it out. A couple of months later, however, he put that speculation to rest by announcing he would run as an independent. It's an interesting choice, as the first thing that comes to mind is that running without Party backing would weaken his chances. That has proven true in some respects, particularly in terms of ballot access. As of press time, Nader has not actually qualified to be on the ballot in any state and has admitted that showing up on all 50 will be a difficult task. There is, though, another angle on Nader's choice to go independent. In doing so he is free to set his own agenda and, potentially, piggyback on the support of more than just one outsider Party. The first inklings of that showed up on May 12th when he accepted the endorsement of the Reform Party, which will not run its own candidate. If the Greens also choose not to nominate a candidate Nader could conceivably end up running with the backing of two Parties. As long as John Kerry continues to live down to expectations look for Nader's profile to increase.

Where He Stands on Some Major Issues
Nader is the only truly left-of-center candidate in position to make an impact. He opposes the Iraq war and occupation and favors withdrawal of the troops; he is in favor of recognizing same-sex marriages; he is pro-choice; he favors universal healthcare; he would repeal the Patriot Act and work to expand civil liberties protections; he wants to end the war on drugs; and he favors escalating taxes according to wealth.

What are His Chances?
Nader's chance of winning the election is, despite the arguments of his supporters, nonexistent. But he is uniquely positioned to play a major role in helping decide who does win. It's not as simple as taking votes from John Kerry, however. Nader performed surprisingly well among Republicans in 2000, and many voters on both sides of the spectrum are fed up with a system that consistently puts them in a position to choose the lesser of two evils. Nader offers, much as Ross Perot did, a way to vote against that while still being heard.

THE REST

After considering the Green and Reform Parties the third party landscape grows significantly more barren. A handful of minor candidates drift around here and there, inspiring small (though often passionate) pockets of support. Their impact on the national scene, and even on a local level, is minimal. The urge to write them off, however, is part of the reason that our electoral system has developed some of the problems it has.

THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY

The Libertarians were in the interesting position of actually having a hotly contested nomination, and they resolved that situation at their Atlanta convention on May 30th. Their choice is Michael Badnarik, a 49-year-old Constitutional scholar from Texas. Prior to actually winning the nomination Badnarik had been considered a long shot, polling third behind fellow candidates Aaron Russo and Gary Nolan. However, his performance during convention debates, along with his particular focus on Constitutional issues, ended up winning over many Party undecideds.

Where He Stands on Some Major Issues
Badnarik's positions comport well with the Libertarian movement as a whole. He favors sharply cutting back on taxes and Federal spending, including the elimination of social programs like education and healthcare. He would sharply reduce our military's role in international affairs including withdrawing our troops from Iraq. He is in favor of gun rights, is anti-abortion, and would end the war on drugs. In general, Badnarik and the Libertarians believe in reducing the Federal government to only its most basic and essential functions.

What are the Libertarian Party's Chances?
The Libertarians are unlikely to have a Nader-level impact, but recent years have seen them grow more and more prominent. Their pitch for less government and more personal responsibility and local authority has a broad-based appeal that makes them a logical pick to eventually become a potent force.

THE CONSTITUTION PARTY

The Constitution Party is little more than a hiccup, but they do inspire passionate support. For them everything starts and ends with God, and their vision for America follows from that. Their nominee for President is Michael Peroutka, a Maryland-based lawyer and founder of the nonprofit Institute on the Constitution. He's been active in Conservative politics for a number of years, including a recent show of support for embattled Alabama Judge Roy Moore.

Where He Stands on Some Major Issues
Easily the most conservative candidate, Peroutka, like the Constitution Party as a whole, makes Bible-based governance the main plank in his platform. He is a strict constructionist with a narrow view of what the Constitution means, and his goal is to enact government according to that interpretation. He is opposed to the Iraq war and similar interventions; he is anti-homosexual (not only on the question of gay marriage); he is vehemently anti-abortion; he opposes government funding of social programs such as healthcare; and he is opposed to taxes.

What are His Chances?
Peroutka will not register on a national scale in this election, and neither will his Party. Over time, though, they could evolve into something of note. Conservatives, especially those who would like to see religion in government, might see the Republicans as not active enough and find solace in the Constitution Party's message.

THE SOCIALIST PARTY

Although they don't really register on a national scale anymore the Socialists are, in fact, an active political Party. There was a time when Socialist candidates routinely ranked on the national scale, most notably Eugene Debs in the early 1900's. Their candidate this year is Walt Brown, a WWII veteran and former Oregon State Senator who has been a Socialist since 1948.

Where He Stands on Some Major Issues
Brown's campaign tenets don't specifically address the issues of the day ­ his is a broad vision for a different America and his statements reflect that. Specifically, he is in favor of full employment, aggressive pursuit of equal rights for all at the expense of government and big business, the establishment of collective services such as health care, and an end to war.

What are His Chances?
His chances of doing anything are Peroutka-esque, and perhaps not even that. But, like the Constitution Party, the Socialists inspire passion and could work their way into a position of impacting local or state races.

THE GIANTS

There's no shortage of information out there about the positions of John Kerry and George Bush, but there are misconceptions. We’ve heard a lot about how important this election is, and most of it has been true. Nevertheless, as a recent Washington Post article pointed out, the two men agree on most of the major issues. The differences between them are matters of approach, not of ideas. For example, both Bush and Kerry support staying the course in Iraq, with Kerry favoring more international involvement than Bush while simultaneously calling for an increase in our troop commitment. Both men are opposed to gay marriage, with Kerry stopping short of agreeing with Bush on the need for an amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. While Bush has the pro-life vote clearly staked out, Kerry has said that he would consider appointing anti-abortion judges. Both candidates seem to be stumbling over each other trying to pledge support for the Patriot Act. And both men support Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's Gaza withdrawal plan with no apparent disagreement. Let us remember that voting is an act best performed under the heavy influence of information, even if what you dig up isn't exactly what you wanted to hear. Find out.

DISCLAIMER: THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN OLDSPEAK ARE NOT NECESSARILY THOSE OF THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE.

Donate

Copyright 2024 © The Rutherford Institute • Post Office Box 7482 • Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482 (434) 978-3888
The Rutherford Institute is a registered 501(c)(3) organization. All donations are fully deductible as a charitable contribution.