With Lynne Williams out of the gubernatorial contest, the question invariably comes up, “where do the Greens go?”  More to the point, the question really comes down to this:  “who exactly benefits from the lack of a Green Party candidate on the ballot”.

Last week I argued that Democrats would benefit:

But the lack of a top tier Green candidate has long lasting reverberations, especially in November.  Now the Democrats – particularly if they nominate somebody viewed as credible with the anti-establishment, environmental left (particularly Scarcelli or McGowan, in my opinion) – will have an easier time unifying the left.  It is true, Democrats will still face a daunting task with the presence of Eliot Cutler who has considerable credibility on left – but it will still be easier than dealing with both him and a Green Party challenger.  This may allow the Democratic nominee a certain amount of leeway to run to the center in an attempt to outflank the Republican nominee and Cutler.

In conversations with a few people I realized that perhaps my logic here was not sufficiently clear.  I was not arguing that Green voters would be re-entering the Democratic fold (although a small number undoubtedly would vote for the Democratic nominee) – my point was that the lack of a gravity well to the left of the Democrats meant that the Democratic candidate will not be pulled in that direction, either rhetorically or in policy proposals, will be more free to drive at the center of Maine politics, and will be able to present a more united front as a result.

In other words, a Democrat who wants to appeal to voters who care about the environment will face no opposition from a Green candidate (remember, not all Green Party votes in November were members of the Green Party – more than a few Independents and Democrats crossed over), and as a result will not feel compelled to pander to that segment of the voting population during the campaign.  Were a Green candidate present, they would bring up several topics (not necessarily all tied into the environment) that would make a Democrat’s ability to appeal to true blue environmentalists somewhat more difficult.

Now, perhaps I’m quibbling over minor details here, but I happen to think things like this matter.  The presence of a lunatic, borderline anarchist right-wing candidate would pull the Republican candidate rightward.  Indeed, I have noticed this taking place even without such a third party candidate making noise, simply due to the energy of Maine’s rather small and uninfluential Tea Party crowd. Many Republicans are going a little far in trying to appeal to the crowd with that energy.

When any candidate of an establishment party sees real energy and enthusiasm to their flank, the natural response is to drift in that direction to try to capture some of that momentum for your own candidacy, even if in reality you will never get those people to vote for you.  Without it there, a candidate is more free to soften their positions and attempt to appeal to the center, given that their flank is essentially protected.

So essentially, the lack of a Green candidate may not give extra raw votes to the Democrat, but it changes the dynamic of the politics of the race in such a way that I think it helps the Democrat run a broader campaign in November.

But as to who specifically benefits from the voters themselves, there are only two answers to that in my head.

The first answer is no one.  Green voters are fickle by nature as it is, and are not members of their political party for the clout it offers.  Their votes are almost always protest votes – almost never are they realistically calculated for who they believe will, or even can win an election.

As such, with likely no candidate who talks up the Green agenda (which, again, is a lot more than simply environmental issues), there is a very strong possibility that these voters will have no incentive to vote, and if they do their votes will either skip the gubernatorial candidate, write somebody in, vote for another third party (Greens sometimes cross over for Libertarian Party candidates, believe it or not), or distribute their votes across multiple candidates.  I’ve talked to more than a few Greens who have pledged to vote for a Republican in elections where there is no Green, in protest of the Democratic Party not taking their agenda seriously.  I’m sure there are plenty who would vote for the lesser of two evils, or go for the Independent.

Speaking of the Independent, that brings us to Eliot Cutler, the second answer to the “who may benefit?” question.

If Green voters are going to participate in this election, there could potentially be a perfect storm brewing around Cutler that would allow them some level of satisfaction in voting for him.  Let me explain.

A Green voter is, at their core, fed up with the two parties.  They tend to be either former Democrats who became disillusioned with the party for moderating and selling out the environmental agenda, or people who never belonged to a political party or movement because they felt shut out from the process and care about Green issues.

They are also on the left of the political spectrum, outside of the Democratic Party mainstream.  You will find them advocating for more extreme versions of what Democrats do.

Mr. Cutler (rightly) enjoyed ribbing me last week for continually saying that he “has credibility with the left” – but my words are hedged there for a reason:  I use the word “credibility” because his history with politics, but more importantly issues (he helped write the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, for example) allows him to talk about things that are important to the left without sounding like he is pandering, insincere or unfriendly.  But at the same time, I say he has credibility as a conscious way of saying, “he is not a traditional leftist” – in other terms, he NEEDS credibility, because his platform, campaign, rhetoric, and general persona are far more dynamic than simply a cookie cutter left-wing politician.

Indeed, he would quickly point out that he changed his registration to Republican to work for the election of Peter Mills in 2006, and has since been an Independent.  His history is that of a man who worked at the OMB for President Carter, which clearly helped shape his sensibilities on budget priorities and long term fiscal planning, which makes up the bulk of what he talks about when you sit down and chat about politics with him.  Since announcing his candidacy, he has talked about everything from charter schools, to “doing away with programs we don’t need”, to efficiency in government.  He is – I believe genuinely (as in he isn’t faking it) - far more fiscally conservative than any of the Democrats running, by a long shot.

The point here being, he is to the right of most Greens on many issues, but due to certain parts of his personal history, he has enough (sorry Eliot) “credibility” with the left to pacify the concerns they may have over his conservative streak, and allow them to be open to supporting him.

But more importantly, Cutler has presented himself as a straight shooting alternative to the Democrat-Republican dichotomy in this election – in other words, a candidate outside “the system”.  If you are an anti-establishment voter, tired of Republicans and Democrats, where would you turn in this election?  The only realistic options are not voting, or voting for Cutler.  Given the fact that I think most Greens can feel politically comfortable with Cutler, this becomes a real possibility.

The remaining challenge for Cutler will be convincing this group (and many similarly minded Independents) that his brand of anti-establishment is in line with theirs.  His challengers will undoubtedly look to paint him as somebody who was part of the establishment 30-40 years ago, and is now nothing more than an establishment retread.  If Cutler is deftly able to parry that line of attack and re-pivot that he has been a private businessman and lawyer since then and remains untainted by current involvement in public service, he may find success with this crowd.  It will be an interesting dynamic to watch as it plays out.

Now, what will really happen on election day?

That is anyone’s guess.  I personally think it will be some mix of “all of the above”, with a dramatic number of Greens simply staying home or lodging protest votes, but those who do strategically vote, I think will end up moving to Cutler in some numbers.

Popularity: 2% [?]