Ross Perot’s 1996 showing of 8,085,402 was the party’s first and most significant entry into Presidential politics.
Then in 2000, the party nominated Pat Buchanan and still captured a respectable (by third party standards) total of 449,225 votes.
In 2004, what remained of the party endorsed Ralph Nader’s campaign which won 463,655… but only a fraction of that came on Reform Party ballot-lines.
This year, it looks like the part will poll maybe 500 votes for unknown nominee Ted Weill.
Stick a fork in it.
The Reform Party isn’t “dead,” it is just in shambles. Years of lawsuits, infighting, and the remnants of the Buchanan brigade did it. The party, on a national level, is trying to organize for an actual run in 2012.
Ted Weill, the 2008 candidate, is a good fellow, however, even he admits that a viable run was impossible on such a shattered party.
http://colorblinddj.bravehost.com/Column/2009/Ted_Weill.html
Umm…because he was a far right extremist best suited for the Consitution Party than the Reform Party. If I recall correctly Perot never made abortion and far right social views a part of his platform in 92 and 96 where as Buchanan wanted to take the Reform Party to the extreme right. This is evident with Fulani and the NY Independence Party and the Minnesota Independence Party both disaffiliating with the National Reform Party I believe that very year.
I don’t recall him being excluded by the media. He was treated on equal footing with Nader, I think.
See the link in #15.
Also, conservatives how did not like Bush could also go for Browne and Phillips, whereas Nader had the entire disaffected left to himself unless they went hardcore socialist.
And Bush did not yet have nearly as much of a reason for conservatives not to like him before he took office.
2000 was the big disaster for this party. I still don’t understand that one. Why did Buchanan do so horribly? I realize he was excluded by the media (they seemed to have anointed Nader “the” third party candidate that year), but still? Buchanan’s experience and the strength of the party circa 2000 should’ve pointed to a somewhat strong finish. Why did he fall totally flat?
The American Independent Party took almost 30 years to accomplish what the Reform Party did in just 12.
They are the Natural Law Party then. A couple of ghost affiliates floating along and affiliating themselves with other parties.
Also, I believe the Kansas Reform Party retained ballot access with their Senatorial candidate, Joseph Martin. They also fielded a candidate in each of the 4 or 5 house districts.
They had a few candidates in PA, and endorsed John Murphy.
They’ll have to fight the Republicans for that I.
Yes, once a Party of REAL promise, the RP might as well sick the letter “I” between the “R” and “P”.
A look back in time:
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0800buchanan.htm
I understand Russell Verney had something to do with that…
Pat Buchanan’s run was indeed below expectations, given that the Reform Party had received about 9% of the vote the previous time, had elected a Governor, and also given that Buchanan was a widely known media personality since the 1960s, had served in the Nixon and Reagan administrations, and had run in the Republican presidential primaries in 1992 and 1996.
All that, and the tens of millions of dollars the party had for his campaign, didn’t buy him a much better showing than Harry Browne, and nowhere in the league of Nader that year.
Richard Winger is correct. They may be dead, but there’s nothing official about it. In fact, I have read that their voter registrations are increasing in California.
The word “officially” is not a good choice of words for the title of this post. Nothing official has happened. The party still has about 30,000 registered voters nationwide, is still on the ballot in 4 states, and still has people claiming to be national party officers.
I, personally, think it is wrong to characterize Buchanan’s 2000 campaign as anything but an outrageous disaster. The RP he took over had what, $15 million in federal funds since the RP was a qualfied national prty. And He had the whole Bridagista movement, and he couldn’t even pull down 500k?
I’ve often wondered — and I’m not prone to conspiracy theorizing — if Buchanan was some sort secret agent sent in to destroy the RP? I mean, the whole campaign they ran in ’00 was nothing, no real effort to build the campaign or party. Worse than Barr’s recent debacle! I mean as far as money raised and spent by Buchanan and the RP, per vote garnered.
What’s the sticking point?
The Kansas Reform Party has been in talks to affilliate with the CP for quite some time.
Yeah, Paulie, the Reform Party’s platform isn’t anything to brag about.
Morgan: They don’t mention god
If you don’t stand for anything, you’ll fall.
I wish we didn’t measure the success of third parties on how their presidential candidates performed. That said the Reform Party once showed great promise but now serves as an omen to the rest of the third party world.
#3: I suspect they might be ideologically closer to the Constitution Party, knowing very little about any of the three…
Why don’t they join the LP? They suck.
Thus is the fate of all cults of personality.
They still have a fairly active state party in Kansas.