Voters turn their backs on Democrats and Republicans
OPINION:IN 1951, Samuel Lubell invented the concept of the political solar system. At any moment, he wrote, there is a Sun Party (the majority party, which drives the agenda) and a Moon Party (the minority party, which shines by reflecting the solar rays).
During Franklin D Roosevelt’s era, Democrats were the Sun Party. During Ronald Reagan’s, Republicans were. Then, between 1996 and 2004, the two parties were tied. We lived in a 50-50 nation in which the overall party vote totals barely budged five elections in a row. It seemed then that we were in a moment of transition, waiting for the next Sun Party to emerge.
But something strange happened. No party took the lead. According to data today, both parties have become minority parties simultaneously. We are living in the era of two moons and no sun. It used to be that the parties were on a seesaw: if the ratings of one dropped, then the ratings of the other rose. But now the two parties have record low approval ratings together. Neither party has been able to rally the country behind its vision.
Ronald Brownstein summarised the underlying typography recently in the National Journal: “In Allstate/National Journal Heartland Monitor polls over the past two years, up to 40 per cent of Americans have consistently expressed support for the conservative view that government is more the problem than the solution for the nation’s challenges; about another 30 per cent have backed the Democratic view that government must take an active role in the economy; and the remaining 30 per cent are agnostic. They are open to government activism in theory but sceptical it will help them in practice.” In these circumstances, both parties have developed minority mentalities. The Republicans feel oppressed by the cultural establishment, and Democrats feel oppressed by the corporate establishment. They embrace the mental habits that have always been adopted by those who feel themselves resisting the onslaught of a dominant culture.
Their main fear is that they will lose their identity and cohesion if their members compromise with the larger world. They erect clear and rigid boundaries separating themselves from their enemies. In a hostile world, they erect rules and pledges and become hypervigilant about deviationism. They are more interested in protecting their special interests than converting outsiders. They slowly encase themselves in an epistemic cocoon.
The Democrat and Republican parties used to contain serious internal debates – between moderate and conservative Republicans, between New Democrats and liberals. Neither party does now. The Democratic and Republican parties used to promote skilled coalition builders. Now the American parties have come to resemble the ideologically coherent European ones. The Democrats talk and look like a conventional liberal party (some liberals, who represent, at most, 30 per cent of the country, are disappointed because President Barack Obama hasn’t ushered in a Huffington Post paradise). Meanwhile, many Republicans flock to Herman Cain or Newt Gingrich because they are more interested in having a leader who can take on the mainstream news media than in having one who can plausibly govern. Grover Norquist’s tax pledge isn’t really about public policy; it’s a chastity belt Republican politicians wear to show they haven’t been defiled by the Washington culture.
The era of the two moons is a volatile era. Independent voters are trapped in a cycle of sour rejectionism – voting against whichever of the two options they dislike most. The shift between the 2008 election, when voters rejected Republicans, and the 2010 election, when voters rejected Democrats, was as big as any shift in recent history.
Sometimes voters even reject both parties on the same day. In Ohio last month, for example, voters rejected the main fiscal policy of the Republican governor. On the same ballot, by 31 points, they rejected healthcare reform, the main initiative of their Democratic president.
In policy terms, the era of the two moons is an era of stagnation. Each party is too weak to push its own agenda and too encased by its own cocoon to agree to a hybrid. The supercommittee failed for this reason. Members of the supercommittee actually took some brave steps outside party orthodoxy (Republicans embraced progressive tax increases, Democrats flirted with spending cuts), but these were baby steps, insufficient to change the alignment.
In normal circumstances, minority parties suffer electoral defeats and then modernise. But with two moons, the parties enjoy periodic election victories they don’t deserve, which only reinforce their worst habits. Itis hard to see the way out unless a third force emerges and wedges itself into one of the two parties, or unless we have a devastating fiscal crisis – a brutal, cleansing flood, after which the sun will shine again. – (New York Times)