E Pluribus Pluribus

The Eternal American Budget Debate

by Joe Klein

 […]

Several members of the Sanity Clause Oracular Hall of Elders—namely Mark Halperin, John Ellis, George Will and Andrew Sullivan—are touting the candidacy of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and/or Tucker Carlson and/or the No Labels effort to get a third party on the ballot in all 50 states. These are top-of-the-list political thinkers; I am a humble paid subscriber to their newsletters and you should be, too. But, I must protest! This is an act of transcendent, year-before, nothing-happening-right-now boredom. Sullivan is candid about that: “The thought of a Trump-Biden rematch is soul-deadening and mind-numbing to me and others.” Yeah, but the thought of an authoritarian, illiberal America is worse. Anything that helps Donald Trump is, by definition, bad for democracy. You don’t want to play with that sort of fire, Andrew. But Ellis argues, persuasively, that the Kennedy candidacy could be consequential: it could help Trump by weakening Biden:

The fact that [Kennedy] won’t be the 2024 Democratic presidential nominee does not mean he won’t have a significant impact on the 2024 presidential campaign. Ask Lyndon Johnson if Sen. Gene McCarthy had any chance of being the Democratic presidential nominee in 1968. Ask George H.W. Bush if Pat Buchanan had any chance of being the Republican presidential nominee in 1992. Neither McCarthy nor Buchanan had a realistic chance of being their respective parties’ nominees. Both men had a measurable impact on the outcome of the general elections in 1968 and 1992.

McCarthy and Buchanan were “messengers.” The “establishment” reaction to their candidacies was “shoot the messenger.” But they persisted, and subsisted, because they gave voice to discontent. That’s what some candidates become, sometimes. They become vehicles of discontent.

As a vehicle of discontent, you could do worse than Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Kennedy certainly gives voice to the always-feverish environmental, conspiratorial, isolationist, anti-vax populist nutters in the Democratic Party. He certainly will be more “fun” to watch than Biden. And catnip to political writers and other thrill-seeking political junkies. And therefore dangerous. As George W. Bush once said, “You may think Bill Clinton beat my dad. He didn’t. Pat Buchanan beat my dad.”

Tucker Carlson is another story. Ellis thinks he may have a (very long) shot if he runs for President. I agree…and while a Carlson candidacy would draw from the same cesspool as Trump, and might cut the demagogue’s strength, he may be more dangerous than Trump because he is so good at TV.