The Presidential Debates of Lore
In the deep recesses of CSPAN or CSPAN 2 in the year 2000, a debate between the presidential candidates of the Natural Law Party, Constitution Party, and Libertarian Party was shown. The only thing I remember from this was the debating over who would take over the remnants of the Reform Party: the mantle for Conservatism since Pat Buchanan of the Reform Party was floundering, and the Natural Law candidate saying he was the natural heir since he was in a court fight over who was the actual Reform Party candidate.
If that wasn’t enough, there was also the vice-presidential debate between their respective running-mates. Just in case you needed to know who was a spit and a half away from the button in case John Hagelin or Harry Browne won. The three buttressed the top of their tickets and proceeded to go on about the respective philosophy of “limited government”, “inter-cooperated government” and “biblical government”.
A day or two after the election, in talking about the Florida situation and the election in general, I noticed a sort of underground cult fondness for John Hagelin. Good to see that I wasn’t the only one. (Not that I take Hagelin too seriously, as far as these things go.)
Flash back to 1996, when Saturday Night Live had Dana Carvey playing Ross Perot, attending a third party debate. We go through the various candidates: Perot, miffed that he was sitting there; the candidate for some marginal real party, then the candidate for the Totalitarianism Party, and the candidate for the Female Circumscision Party. (“And what do you believe?” “Well, I believe that all of our nation’s problems will be solved with forcible circumscision of all women.”)
Perot’s rhetoric remains the same. “Sure, we all want a dictatorial totalitarian government to protect us and shield us from our own dangerous thoughts, but who’s gonna pay for it?”
Eventually Perot leaves, and the moderator says “Well, let’s look at the polls.” .0007% for the Totalitarian candidate, .00009% for the Female Circumscision Party candidate… an argument ensures, which leaves one of the candidates saying “Yeah, you can say that… being the front-runner.”
It’s a much more interesting debate than the “Memorandum of Understanding” — constricted pountering of talking points that we get. (See here.)
Jump back to the Simpsons, where Kudos and Klang take over the bodies of Clinton and Dole. When exposed as aliens, the crowd murmurs. “I believe I will have to vote for a third party candidate.” “Go ahead. Waste your vote.” The crowd gasps. Perot punches a hole into his hat. And, after the planet is completely enslaved and we see the Simpsons in a slave-camp, Homer says “Don’t believe me. I voted for Kudos.”
Or maybe the leader of the now defunt Natural Law candidate?