Last week’s strange political news included word that former Senator Mike Gravel was running for the Libertarian Party’s nomination. When you also consider the bolting of former congressmen Bob Barr (from the Republican Party to the Libertarian Party) and Cynthia McKinney (from the Democratic Party to the Green Party) and the alleged forthcoming Tax Day conversion of former ambassador Alan Keyes (from the Republican Party to the Constitution Party), it certainly appears that alternative political parties are becoming all the rage these days. This is a great thing to bring visibility and hopefully future electoral viability to a number of American political movements. Of this list of aforementioned pols who’ve switched or are about to switch, I find Mike Gravel’s conversion a bit dubious for four reasons:

1. Animosity over a recent Nader snub
2. Claims of being more libertarian than Ron Paul
3. Bloomberg, Nader, Unity08, Robert Milnes, etc.
4. Mistaking being liked in a relative sense for being liked in an absolute sense

First, Gravel endorsed Green candidate Jesse Johnson a few weeks ago. This was reported as an attempt to get back at Ralph Nader for something he did. The same thing happened a few years back when Ann Coulter wanted to run for something in Connecticut as a Libertarian. This sends up a red flag in my book that the conversion may primarily be fueled by revenge.

Second, Mike Gravel has claimed to be more libertarian than 1988 Libertarian Party presidential candidate/2008 Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul. Wikipedia lists a number of sects of libertarianism, but I’m not aware of any that Gravel’s views on universal healthcare, global warming, and one-world government would fit comfortably inside. When claiming to be more libertarian than Ron Paul, he’s basing that on the fact that Ron Paul does not personally belief in things like prostitution and gambling. The point of being a libertarian, though, is that you won’t use the power of the government to prohibit things you personally may oppose. One interesting corollary of this is that because this is not Mike Gravel’s understanding of libertarianism *AND* he is more libertarian than Ron Paul, it might indicate that he’s really into gambling and likes to get freaky with the prostitutes. Yeah, he’s going to be more appealing than Ron Paul to a lot of Libertarians in regard to views on issues like abortion and immigration, for instance, but that one-world government thing kind of blows it all to hell.

Third, there’s been a lot of alternative electoral strategies discussed during this election cycle. Senator Gravel may be thinking that parlor tricks or ultra-stealthy tactics will win the election for him. There’s a lot of these ideas out there this year. There’s the “let’s run another insane billionaire as an independent” strategy. The closest we’re going to get this time looks like “let’s run another insane homeless-looking person” campaign strategy used so well be Ralph Nader. The most ambitious plan though that I’ve heard this time around is the “let’s run two people of totally different views on the same ticket” strategy. In the guise of Unity08, this only points out that both parties are essentially the same. Another candidate for the Libertarian presidential nomination, Robert Milnes, is espousing a “progressive alliance” strategy that requires a woman Libertarian to serve as the vice presidential candidate on a Libertarian ticket for which Greens will also vote. I would think that building more parties would be a better strategy for combating supposed wasted vote syndromes and voter apathy toward the few low-quality candidates. I’m not sure if Robert Milnes, Mike Bloomberg, or the Unity 08 staff are working for Gravel, but it kind of seems like they are.

Finally, Mike or someone on his staff probably read positive comments by Libertarians over the past few years on websites. This is like knowing a bunch of people who like and praise you at work, but will not under any circumstance hang out with you outside the office. Or, even better, a chick dumping you by saying she wants to “just be friends” (not that that’s ever happened to me, mind you). According to a number of accounts, Gravel’s not really into political networking, which makes me understand a great deal of his political career. This and his here-and-there political policy goals makes him a man without a political home.

Now don’t get me wrong — I like Mike Gravel. He brings some good ideas to the political discussion, he seems well meaning and steadfast in his convictions, and he’s a hell of a lot of fun to watch in debates and in videos on his YouTube channel. Additionally, as mentioned in previous posts he was my number one choice for the Democratic nomination (just ahead of Dennis Kucinich). The important part of this admission to remember is that I am a (big-L) Libertarian and would love to have a ballot filled with lots of (little-L) libertarians from which to choose regardless of their party label. This is why so many Libertarians got involved in supporting Ron Paul for the Republican nomination, which may have had the side effect of coming up with an overall weak slate of Libertarian presidential candidates this year. Hopefully the delegates of the upcoming Libertarian Party convention will come up with a good candidate. I’m just doubting it will be Mike Gravel.

Due to my busy end-of-semester schedule and my total hatred of the silliness of playing jokes on others (having fallen victim to many such pranks in my youth), there will be no April Fool’s Day post on my blog this year.