譯言網 | 萊剋星敦的醒世恆言：美國政治的左派、右派和中間派眾生相

JUST for this week, indulge in a fantasy. Everything you think you know about next year』s presidential election in America might be wrong. You think you know that the candidates will be Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, or perhaps one of the non-Romneys such as Newt Gingrich. But, just possibly, Americans will be presented with a far wider choice next November. This might even be an election more like the race of 1948, which produced a dazzling array of candidates and a deliciously unpredictable result, when Dewey did not, after all, defeat Truman.

就在本周，人們都沉湎於一個幻想之中。你所知道的任何關於明年美國總統大選的事情很可能都是錯的。你以為你確信總統候選人肯定是奧巴馬和羅姆尼，或者可能不是羅姆尼而是另外什麼人諸如金里奇等等。但是，或許明年11月的時候美國人將會遇到更廣泛的選擇。這將有可能與1948年的大選相類似，那次大選產生的候選人令人眩目，而結果更是匪夷所思撲朔迷離——當然，杜威還是沒能擊敗杜魯門成為總統。

The reason for entertaining this idea is the universal belief that America』s politics are 「broken」. From the tents of Occupy Wall Street to the firesides of Georgetown, the cry goes up that the ideological polarisation of the political parties leaves the great bulk of the electorate unrepresented. This newspaper cares very much about this 「missing middle」. But is it just the middle that has gone missing? Many Americans lament what they consider the missing right, and some complain of a missing left as well.

用娛樂的心態來調侃美國大選的原因是公眾目前普遍認為美國的政治是「破敗不堪的」。從「佔領華爾街」的帳篷到喬治敦的圍爐邊，抗議的哭喊聲愈演愈烈，而政黨之間意識形態的兩極化更導致了無代表選民的大量增加。這就是報紙所關心的「迷失的中間選民」。然而所迷失的僅僅只是中間選民嗎？不少美國人哀嘆他們右翼理念迷失，而同樣的，也有人抱怨左翼的迷失。

Indeed, start with the left. Barack Obama is not facing a primary challenger from his own party, but he almost did. For all the Republican nonsense about the president being a 「socialist」, a group of deep-pocketed Democratic donors is so disappointed by what they see as his timid centrism that they trawled the country for a candidate willing to take him on from the left. The name on some lips was that of Russ Feingold, a former senator from Wisconsin. In the event, nobody was willing to run. But that, says one corporate titan involved in the effort, was only because no Democrat dared to risk bringing down the country』s first black president. Had he been white, it would have been different.

沒錯，問題從左翼發端。奧巴馬並沒有面對來自其黨內的的主要挑戰者，但他之前幾乎要面對了。所有的共和黨人都胡亂指責他是一名「社會主義者」，而一組財大氣粗的民主黨捐助者對於奧巴馬走謹小慎微的中間派路線更是感到相當失望，以致他們在全國搜羅新的候選人慾將奧巴馬取而代之。這些捐助人的代表之一就是被很多人經常念叨的前威斯康星議員拉斯.法因戈爾德。結果，沒有人願意承擔運作此事的任務。正如該捐助團體一位大佬所指稱的那般，僅僅只是因為民主黨人不敢冒險將美國歷史上的第一位黑人總統拉下馬，他們的計劃才因此作罷。假使奧巴馬是個白人，那麼也許情況就不盡相同了。

What about the missing right? It is not missing at all, say those Democrats who think that the tea-party movement has wormed its way into the brain of Republicanism, taking it over and driving it mad. But tea-partiers will consider all the worming and the takeover to have been for naught if a candidate from the right of the party fails to win its presidential nomination. So it is not at all fantastical to think that if Mr Romney secures the nomination a more authentic conservative will decide to go it alone.

那麼關於迷失的右翼勢力又是如何呢？那些民主黨人士認為，茶黨運動已經如蠕蟲般鑽進了共和黨的腦髓，將其理念取而代之並讓其瘋狂，因此這已經完全不是右翼保守勢力的迷失了。不過，如果來自右翼政黨的候選人無法贏得候選總統提名的資格，那麼茶黨成員會認為此前所有的努力都會化為烏有。如果羅姆尼議員把提名資格弄到手，這位更加老牌的保守人士會決定自己單幹的——因此這種想法並非完全是幻想。

The fact that Mr Romney has so far failed to win over more than a quarter of Republican voters suggests that his nomination would leave a tempting gap in the ideological market—too tempting, perhaps, for Ron Paul, a Texan libertarian, to resist trying to fill it. Though Mr Paul is running as a Republican, in 1988 he was the presidential candidate of the tiny Libertarian Party. He has an avid following, but it is small, and he must know that he will never be president. All the same, by staying in the race under a different banner he could continue what is probably anyway his real goal, namely to educate Americans about the evils of the Fed, the madness of foreign entanglements and so forth.

羅姆尼議員至今未能贏得超過四分之一的黨內投票，而這一事實表明對他的提名的不信任將有可能在意識形態領域出現一個誘人的空缺——這個空缺可能對來自德州的自由主義者羅恩.保羅來說是個巨大的誘惑，以至於會令他堅持去嘗試把這一空缺填上。儘管保羅現在作為一名共和黨黨員進行參選，但在1988年他是小型黨派自由黨的總統候選人。他確實有一批十分熱衷的支持者，但這規模仍然很小，那麼他必須了解他將永遠不會成為總統。與此同時，留在這場競選中，他仍然可以憑藉他獨樹一幟的競選綱領表明他任何真實的目標，即教育美國人，讓他們去見識美聯儲醜惡的面目，以及美國對外關係的瘋狂糾葛等等等等。

As for the missing middle, next year will see an innovation. In June 2012, well before the Republican convention in Florida and the Democratic convention in North Carolina, an organisation calling itself 「Americans Elect」 will hold an online nominating convention of its own. Its plan is not to create a third party but to use the internet to choose a presidential candidate from any party (who will in turn have to pick a running-mate from a different one) and put this non-partisan ticket on the ballot in every state. The outfit has already collected more than 2m of 3m or so signatures it will need to satisfy every state』s ballot requirements.

而對迷失的中間派來說，他們明年將會看到一場變革。明年6月，共和黨和民主黨將分別佛州和在北卡召開全國代表大會，而在兩黨開大會之前，一個自稱為「美國人之選」的組織將召開一次在線的總統候選人大會。該大會的計劃並不是要建立第三個政黨去參與競選，而是要通過互聯網從各黨派中選擇一名總統候選人（該候選人反過來還不得不從另一黨中選擇一位競選夥伴）並將這一無黨派的提名寫在各州的選票上。該組織已經收集了超過200萬的簽名——要滿足各州選票的要求，則該數字應超過300萬。

Americans Elect has the benefit of rich sponsors (one of its promoters is Peter Ackerman, a philanthropist who made his fortune in the finance industry) and good timing. Polls suggest that Americans are heartily sick of the established party machines and a system of primary elections that forces candidates to pander to the extremes instead of reaching for the centre. It is not completely impossible that it could attract a big name with bags of money as its candidate. Michael Bloomberg, the post-partisan billionaire mayor of New York City, claims right now not to be interested in a presidential run. But he could change his mind, especially if the Republicans plump for one of their scarier ideologues—Mr Gingrich?—instead of the pliant Mr Romney, thus creating an opening in the centre.

「美國人之選」組織擁有富裕贊助商的利益（其發起人之一是在金融領域發財的慈善家皮特.阿克曼）以及好的時機。民調顯示，美國人對於建立在政黨基礎之上的總統初選機制深惡痛絕，而這一制度強迫候選人去迎合極左或極右的政治理念，以取代中間路線。並非完全不可能的事實是，這一制度可以借候選人之名收斂一大筆資金。邁克爾.布隆伯格，這位無黨派的百萬富翁作為紐約市的市長，聲稱此刻他對於總統競選沒有絲毫興趣。不過他有可能改變主意，尤其是當共和黨選定該黨內恐怖無比的意識形態主義者——金里奇——以取代較溫和的羅姆尼時，從而為中間派製造一個開放性的空間。

Better the duopoly you know?

勝過雙寡頭壟斷？沒錯！

Precisely because it is more than a quixotic fancy, Americans Elect is controversial. In the Washington Post, Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute and Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution have highlighted the pitfalls. Even a strong independent from the centre would be hard put in a three-way race to win a majority of the 538 votes of the electoral college. But such a candidate might also prevent the others from gaining a majority. The constitution would in that case leave the final vote to the (highly partisan) House of Representatives. In the unlikely event of the third candidate winning, how would he or she govern with no party allies in Congress? And what if a third candidate merely attracted enough centrist voters away from Mr Obama to give victory to a far-right Republican nominee?

正是因為這種近乎堂吉訶德式的偏執自負態度，「美國人之選」充斥著爭議之聲。美國企業研究所的諾曼.奧恩斯坦和布魯金斯研究所的托馬斯.曼已經在華盛頓郵報上撰文強調這是一個圈套。即使是來自中間派的強勢獨立參選人參加三方競選，也將很難在由538名選舉人組成的總統選舉團中贏得大多數的選票。但這樣的候選人可能也會阻礙其他候選人贏得多數選票。而在這種情況下，憲法會將最終的投票權交給眾議院（黨派色彩濃厚）。若真的發生了意外狀況，由第三方獨立候選人當選總統，那麼他或她將如何掌控與其毫無黨派關聯的國會呢？而且，要是該第三方獨立候選人無法從奧巴馬手裡吸引足夠多的中間派選票而將勝利拱手讓給極右的共和黨被提名人，那又該怎麼辦呢？

The doubters are probably right. Gridlock in Congress is arguably the biggest obstacle to effective government, and there is no attempt to form a third party there. Besides, third parties and independent candidates have had a lousy record. In 1992 Ross Perot won 19% of the popular vote but not a single vote in the electoral college. In 1912 Theodore Roosevelt, a former Republican president running as a Progressive, won 27% of the popular vote and outpolled his Republican successor, Howard Taft. But that only handed victory to the Democrats』 Woodrow Wilson. Even so, just think: Obama versus Romney versus Paul, or Obama versus Gingrich versus Bloomberg. That has to be a lot more fun than a straight two-way race, doesn』t it?

這些質疑的聲音恐怕是正確的。對效率政府而言，毫無疑問最大的障礙就來自國會中的僵局，而國會也無意形成第三個黨派。除此之外，第三方黨派和獨立參選人在選舉歷史上都曾有很糟糕的記錄。1992年，羅斯.佩羅特贏得了19%的普選選票，卻沒有一張票來自選舉人團。而1912年的前總統、共和黨人西奧多.羅斯福以進步黨的身份參選，他贏得了27%的普選選票並且他的得票數多於他同為共和黨的繼任者——霍華德.塔夫脫。但兩敗俱傷的結局僅僅只是把最終的勝利交給了民主黨的伍德羅.威爾遜。即便如此，讓我們來設想一下吧：奧巴馬與羅姆尼及保羅一起競選，或者奧巴馬與金里奇及布隆伯格一起競選。這毫無疑問將會比兩黨競爭更有趣，不是嗎？