Ramesh Ponnuru: There’s a new centrist political party. It’s going nowhere

From the commentary:

New York City mayoral candidate Andrew Yang holds up his campaign's petition signatures as he speaks outside the NYC Board of Elections office on March 23, 2021, in New York City.
New York City mayoral candidate Andrew Yang holds up his campaign's petition signatures as he speaks outside the NYC Board of Elections office on March 23, 2021, in New York City.
Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images/TNS
We are part of The Trust Project.

The founders of a new political party, “Forward,” acknowledge that third parties usually fail. They say that previous third-party efforts flopped “either because they were ideologically too narrow or the population was uninterested.”

More Commentary:
From the commentary: Speaking for myself, here's a recent use of the term I found merited, accurate and admirable. ... Cassidy Hutchinson, testifying in front of a packed hearing room and 13 million television viewers, spoke with uncommon composure as she described seeing the U.S. Capitol "defaced over a lie" and overrun on Jan. 6, 2021. "It was un-American," she said. Yes it was. Good for her for saying so.
From the commentary: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is already taking that risk, but the bigger one may be a miscalculation of the Republican primary electorate and what it may look like in two years. The bad news for DeSantis: It might well look like Kansas. The bad weather could spread for Republicans as their fondest wish — the overruling of Roe v. Wade — turns into an electoral disaster.
From the commentary: And so, in local and national elections in the coming months, to say nothing of the presidential election in 2024, that small slice of the electorate that actually considers both sides before casting their votes will be charged with determining whether a group of men and women who would undermine the foundation on which American democracy is built will be allowed to once again attempt to do so. We can only hope they make the right choice.
From the commentary:

Theirs will succeed, they reason, because polls show that Americans are eager for an alternative to the two dominant parties and theirs will be broad-based and moderate. That’s the explanation that two former Republicans and one former Democrat — former U.S. Rep. David Jolly of Florida, former New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman and 2020 presidential candidate Andrew Yang — offered in the Washington Post.

What they say about what their new party will stand for is vague enough to sound attractive. As a general proposition, going forward beats the alternatives. But people don’t always agree on where they should go forward to. The trio is attempting to get broad support by not specifying a destination.

There is immense dissatisfaction with the Democrats and Republicans, but that dissatisfaction is diffuse. Some people think neither party is conservative enough, some that neither party is progressive enough.

Some voters favor low taxes and social liberalism, and find neither party fits them well. They think of themselves as moderates. Other voters are unhappy with the parties because they have exactly the opposite views. They want national health insurance and laws against abortion. They think of themselves as moderates, too.


The conceit of Forward is that grievances against the political status quo can unify Americans even though the content of those grievances diverges wildly.

On the issues that move large numbers of voters, all the new party offers is a rejection of caricatures. They do not want to eliminate the Second Amendment, they say, but they do not seek to abolish all gun laws either. You can see the mood they’re trying to summon. But Democrats by and large do not say they are hostile to the Second Amendment, and Republicans rarely say they want to get rid of all gun laws. Forward hasn’t found a spot between the positions of the two parties. In its vagueness, it encompasses the positions of both.

When the trio gets more specific, it is on procedural issues that few voters care or even know about. “We will passionately advocate electoral changes such as ranked-choice voting,” they write. Those of us who find arguments about ranked-choice voting interesting should admit that our interest puts us in a small minority. Most people will passionately ignore Forward on the topic. And anyway, procedural fixes are not a magic way to overcome the divisions among Americans that Forward so studiously ignores.

The parties’ founders go subtly wrong in their diagnosis of what’s wrong with contemporary partisanship, too. They see the problem as “extremism” on the part of the existing parties’ leaders. Their ambition, then, is to liberate the public to select more centrist leaders. What the US actually has is an extremely broad-based negative partisanship. A lot of voters who do not themselves have extreme conservative views regard the progressive coalition with fear and hostility, and vice-versa.

That’s why, even when both parties nominated very unpopular presidential candidates in 2016, fewer than 6% of voters chose someone else. (True to form, these voters did not all agree on a single third-party candidate.)

More Opinion:
From the commentary: If that’s the case, then we can think of the complex system of multiple points where policy ideas can be initiated or vetoed as a mechanism to force those who choose to advocate for something such as a veterans health bill into having to learn the system, bargain with others with equally legitimate private interests and work out compromises. That is, it’s a system that tries to teach the advantages of a life of public participation.
From the commentary: What is significant about the Kansas vote is that a very red state turned out to reject the kind of ban that Idaho and half the other states are likely to adopt. Or, perhaps, not so likely, knowing that voters may reject such bans and the Justice Department is ready to challenge them. If people start thinking about abortion in more realistic terms, as a necessary medical procedure and, in many cases, a life-saving one, the results change, as they did on Tuesday. And perhaps on more Tuesdays to come.
From the commentary: Immigration rights advocates are furious that Biden has weaseled out of the pro-immigration stance he adopted to get elected.
From the commentary: The measure still has some legislative hurdles to jump over before it becomes a reality. But for the evenly divided Senate controlled by Democrats, Manchin could have been the biggest hurdle.
From the commentary: Democrats appear to be in a panic three months before the congressional elections, so they are trying to pretend they are finally "getting things done" before their vacations, other time off and what could be for them judgment day.
From the commentary: And it’s the presence of Manchin that makes all this possible. His presence in the caucus ought to be celebrated rather than tolerated, and recruitment efforts in tough races should deliberately focus on building a team of Manchinist candidates who put clear distance between themselves and mainstream Democrats while also adhering to some progressive positions.
From the commentary: It would be good for doctors and parents to have a more open and honest dialogue about even routine medical practices and procedures.
From the commentary: And so it goes in this city. Today, many thousands of military veterans who are suffering from the same exposure that killed Bill Florey are coping with their latest reality: While it is nice when Republicans sincerely thank them for their service, “obviously it doesn’t help” them as they struggle to pay their medical bills and survive.
Summary: If Biden was surprised by events that occurred on his watch, what does that say about his leadership? The unexpected should be expected, or at least anticipated, when one is president. Perhaps Joe should listen to his wife and start planning for a dignified departure.
From the commentary: And then, of course, there is the planet. Talk to young people today and the hopelessness comes through. They believe they are living at the end of a planetary cycle in which we — the baby boomers, the adults, the ones who were supposed to be trustees of our precious planet — have abdicated our responsibilities.

That year also shows that one of Forward’s fixations, the need to “open” the parties, is a distraction. The Republican Party turned out to be susceptible to being taken over by Donald Trump, a candidate whom most of its leaders detested, even though he held more moderate views than its past leaders on a host of issues including federal spending. Nor have the open primaries that Forward advocates had any noticeable effect in moderating the very liberal politics of California after it adopted them.

Another implicit assumption of the new party is that Americans, though dismayed by Republicans and Democrats, long to be governed by former members of their leadership castes. But to the extent that Americans dissatisfied by the parties share a sentiment, it is disdain for the political elites of the recent past.

Jolly, Whitman and Yang have overlooked one of the key flaws that has doomed previous third parties, and that they themselves exemplify: a weakness for wishful thinking.


Ramesh Ponnuru is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is the editor of National Review and a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

©2022 Bloomberg L.P. Visit Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.


This story was written by one of our partner news agencies. Forum Communications Company uses content from agencies such as Reuters, Kaiser Health News, Tribune News Service and others to provide a wider range of news to our readers. Learn more about the news services FCC uses here.

Related Topics: COMMENTARY
What to read next
"An 80 mph wind ripped through our farmstead near Larimore, North Dakota, toppling trees, some of which landed in inopportune places."
From the commentary: Democrats haven't given up on America. Republicans don't want people to be miserable or dead. Most Americans, whatever their politics, have universal goals, mostly concerning peace and prosperity, and only differ on the paths we ought to take to get there. All we have to do, to make things better in America, is stop listening to the people who say otherwise.
"Despite attempts by people like Winona LaDuke to try to confuse, mislead or misrepresent, reality is something that thankfully cannot be ignored," says Thief River Falls Mayor Brian Holmer.
"Much of the trouble with religion is that we’ve convinced ourselves that we can know an infinite God, a God who created the entire universe that is billions of years old and which still reveals mysteries to us that we cannot solve. And in our hubris, we believe we can also know all of the answers about faith, especially about who is right and, more importantly, who is wrong."