Two different approaches to politics

Democrats and Republicans don't just disagree about policy; they disagree about what kind of political system we have

Photo by Chris Slupski on Unsplash

I have a new article that just came out in The Forum, entitled “Electability and Party Power Across Party Lines.” Yes, I’m afraid it’s paywalled, but hopefully you have access. It opens thusly:

Following the 2016 presidential election, the losing Democrats questioned many things about their party, its decisions, and its nomination processes. They determined they had made a mistake in the nomination of Hillary Clinton and sought to nominate someone perceived as more conventional and more electable in the next election cycle, even though this undermined some core party beliefs about identity and equality. This decision proved successful and the party won in the next cycle.

Following the 2020 presidential election, the losing Republicans largely refused to question core assumptions about their party and its nomination processes. Most decided that their party had been correct in its nomination of Donald Trump, despite his loss, and many in the party insisted, falsely, that he had actually won the election. They largely sought to nominate the same person for the next election cycle, not demanding any moderation or apology from him, and indeed doubled down on his messaging from the previous election. This decision proved successful and the party won in the next cycle.

This is something that continues to fascinate me. Yes, Democrats and Republicans have very different ideas about what policies would be best for America, but perhaps more importantly, they have very different ideas about just what kind of political system we’re living in. Democrats believe that they win when they moderate; Republicans believe that they win when they stand up for what they believe.

There’s plenty of evidence demonstrating this. For example, here’s a piece I wrote last fall about how Democratic senators move to the center when an election is coming up while Republican senators move to the right.

And the funny thing is, both parties are arguably correct in their interpretations. You could look back over the past 60 years of elections and find evidence of Democrats moderating and winning, and of Republicans not moderating and winning.

But we’re seeing the consequences of this every day right now. Republicans are governing in a way generally considered highly politically dangerous; the Trump administration is damaging the functioning of many government services people rely on (like Social Security!) and raising tariffs and laying off enough federal employees to trigger or worsen a recession. People notice stuff like that. Republicans are doing it anyway, under the belief that worrying about electability is a sucker’s game.

Meanwhile, Democrats’ responses to this have been all over the place. Some (particularly those in safe districts) are trying to raise the alarm about what the White House is doing. Others are mostly keeping quiet, or just focusing on a few minor issues, so they don’t look too extreme in next year’s midterm elections. Democrats are convinced of the importance of electability.

I would argue that these two perspectives are toxic in combination. You can have two parties worried about electability and the democratic system can still operate. You can have two intransigent parties and the democratic system can still operate, more or less. But one intransigent party and one party focused on electability means the country will continue to drift in one direction, away from public opinion, away from representative democracy.

Until the parties can agree on just what kind of country we’re living in, we’re only going to have one kind, a dysfunctional one.

Anyway, I hope you’ll read the article!