After several months of speculation, Donald J. Trump, developer, casino operator and self-described womanizer, has decided to drop his bid for the presidency -- a great tragedy for political cartoonists and late-night comedy show hosts. But the power fight within the Reform Party that prompted Mr. Trump's exit, may have much longer-lasting consequences.
Over the past week, the ever-present hostility between the forces loyal to former Presidential candidate Ross Perot and those supporting Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura erupted into a media brawl, more reminiscent of a professional, wrestling match than a party leadership debate. Last Friday, Ventura called the Reform party a "dysfunctional family" and indicated that he would be resigning his membership. Saturday's meeting of party leaders in Nashville turned into a real-life brawl when Ventura's hand-picked National Party Chairman, Jack Gargan was attacked by a woman trying to grab a microphone away from him. Gargan was removed from his position (both figuratively and literally) and Pat Choate, was chosen to be the new party chairman.
The loss of Trump and Ventura, two of the Reform Party's most high-profile members, is a not a lethal blow to the party's continued existence. It is however, more than enough to eliminate the party's chances of winning (yes, another wrestling metaphor) the cage-match known as the 2000 presidential election.
Left with Pat Buchanan as the only candidate (unless Ross Perot decides to run again), there are already signs that the party might endorse John McCain (CNN- 2/15/00). McCain has said he wouldn't be willing to join the party but he would accept their nomination if he received the Republican Party nomination first. If the Reform Party members are willing to nominate the Republican party's candidate, there arises the bigger question of what exactly the Reform Party stands for? But when today's republican party contradicts its own former position on immigration (as is the case with Elin Gonzalez) and the "new" Democrats favor a greater military presence in Kosovo; it is hard to tell what any of our political parties truly stand for.
In 1992, when Ross Perot first emerged as a potential upset-candidate, the main attraction most people had towards the party was as an alternative to a two-party system that had become beholden to the corporate interests. After Ventura's surprise win in 1998, the party was bridled with his reputation for unconventional and somewhat offensive wisdom (such as his statement that organized religion was a good outlet for weak-minded people.) With Buchanan, however, the party runs the risk of moving from a reputation for eccentricities, to a reputation of social ultra-conservatism that may turn people away from the party altogether.
Another problem for the Reform Party is the growing crowd of politicians at the center of the political spectrum. The closer we get to the end of the primaries, the closer to the center the Democrat and Republican candidates seem to drift. Thus far, the Reform Party's solution has been to focus on the one issue that both Democrats and Republicans appear to consistently agree on -- free trade. However, in a booming economy, the number of people worried about losing their jobs to foreign markets is not enough to win an election,. In fact, it might not even be enough to get the 15 percent of national support that the Commission on Presidential Debates has ruled is the minimum required for a candidate's participation in the debates.
In order to regain their reputation as being a viable alternative to the two-party system, the Reform Party must now make some difficult decisions. First, they must drop Pat Buchanan. In his prepared statement, Trump declared, "The Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. [David] Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. [Lenora] Fulani. This is not company I wish to keep." The truth is that most Americans would agree with Trump. Second, the party must develop stronger state and local-level political organizations. Part of the problem with nominating candidates like Trump or Buchanan is that their high-profile personalities and well-known reputations proceed them. The Reform Party needs an unknown with demonstrated political abilities. With a guarantee of $12 million in publicly financed general election funds, the party will have the ability to publicize their candidate. Lastly, the Reform Party needs to rebuild its reputation with an information campaign, explaining its platform and its positions to the American people.
Without taking these steps, the party runs the risk of cementing the notion that it is merely a party of wealthy businessmen, fringe candidates, and absurd behavior.
