Hagel (R-Ne) won't rule out the independent option but history isn't kind

[Omaha Steve]

Published Saturday | May 19, 2007
Hagel won't rule out the independent option but history isn't kind
BY JAKE THOMPSON
WORLD-HERALD BUREAU

WASHINGTON - So here's Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel elaborating on his latest political option: an independent presidential campaign.

Third parties have a history of shaping and driving the agenda of the country at key moments, he said during a Capitol Hill interview this week.

"They're the element of the ideas - because they're freer, they're not chained to special interests. Both political parties are chained to special interests. And it's gotten worse and deeper," the Nebraska lawmaker says.

Of course, he acknowledges, no third-party candidate has won the White House.

"That doesn't mean the right combination at the right time couldn't win," Hagel says. "Would it be difficult? Absolutely. Unprecedented? Absolutely.

"I wouldn't rule it out."


FULL story at link.

Track record Some notable independent and third-party presidential bids:

1992, Texas billionaire Ross Perot picked up 19 percent of the vote. Some say it helped Democrat Bill Clinton defeat President George H.W. Bush.

2000, Green Party candidate Ralph Nader may have helped tip Florida from Democrat Al Gore to Republican George W. Bush. Final Florida results were Bush, 48.85 percent; Gore, 48.84 percent; Nader, 1.63 percent.

1980, John B. Anderson ran as an independent after dropping out of the GOP primaries. He finished third, with just 7 percent.

1968, Former Alabama Democratic Gov. George Wallace, as the American Independent Party candidate, got 13 percent and carried several Southern states.

1948, Strom Thurmond ran as a Dixiecrat, got 2.4 percent of the total vote and won four Southern states; Iowan Henry A. Wallace, the Progressive Party nominee, got 2.3 percent but carried no states.

[JeffR]

1. OTOH, no indy candidate had ES&S voting machines behind him before

:shrug:

[BulletproofLandshark]

2. RUN CHUCK, RUN!!!!

Splinter that Rethug base!

[AndyTiedye]

4. ANY Third Party Makes the Election MUCH Easier for Repiglicans to Steal

[SaveElmer]

3. Hagel is no independent...

He's a right wing Republican who happens to be against the war...on everything else he is at the right end of his party...

[DAMANgoldberg]

6. By the Same Token

Sen. Lieberman is a left wing Independent who happens to be for the war still. Mirror image, if you will.

[TwilightGardener]

5. Chuck wants to be President so bad, he can taste it--

He is one ambitious SOB. Ben Nelson said he thought there was no way Chuck could win, so that alone should spur him to run. Go for it, Chuck! There's no shame in trying and failing, as they say.

[TwilightGardener]

7. Interesting, just read that his name is being floated for World Bank--

wonder if he'll give up prez ambitions for that?

[TreasonousBastard]

8. Been hearing all sorts of mumblings about Bloomberg and..

Hagel going after the "Unity" vote. Truth is, I'd go for either or both of them as Rebulicans or independants than any of the GOP crew now running. If they did manage to win, they wouldn't be the disaster we now have, or that the likes of Giuliani would be.

But, so far it looks like it ain't gonna happen.

[TwilightGardener]

9. I agree--would rather see either of them in place of the wackaloons

they have on the GOP side now. I think either one or the other, or both, will run, though--too much noise and planning. Bloomberg has been scoping out how to get on the ballot in 50 states.