For a couple of years now, it has seemed to me that both the Democratic and Republican Parties are headed for a moment of major realignment, perhaps even collapse.
First, the Republicans. It appears to me that the culture wars--on which the Republicans have become so reliant--have yielded few tangible victories for their voters. With the major exception of the appointment of Justices Roberts and Alito, the Republicans have actually delivered little to the vaunted values voters. For example, there simply will not be a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion, or same-sex marriage, or flag burning, nor will there be a return to state sanctioned prayer in schools, etc. (Ironically, while cultural warriors in the Republican Party are decrying social developments like same-sex marriage, Fortune 500 companies--another constituency of the Republican Party--are including innovations like life-partner medical insurance as part of employment packages.) What does this mean for the Republican coalition? I thought--and still do think--it possible that working-class evangelicals--for example--will abandon the Republican Party and either withdraw from politics entirely--and return to their spiritual knitting--or forge themselves into a new minority Christian party. At the same time, other Republican values voters--who have been so battered by the American economy--will "come home" to the Democratic Party and insist on a more progressive economic agenda that speaks more directly--and honestly--to their "kitchen table" issues. I think we are beginning to see some of this as a younger generation of evangelical leaders--Rick Warren for example--assume leadership.
But, if some values voters, or Reagan Democrats, or, security moms, or neurotic/impotent angry white men, etc., do return to the the Democratic Party--do "come home" with the hope of finding a progressive economic agenda--what will they find? Increasingly, they will find a party whose historic coalition has long since fragmented. The "big tent" party has become--in important ways--a collection of disparite elements where small slices of that shaky coalition find their influence amplified by electoral realities. Indeed, they find that whole regions of the country are rendered irrelevant when it comes to winning the White House. Democrats can ignore Califonia and New York, for example--and focus their energies in Florida and Ohio. They will find, as well, that in the broad Democratic Party coalition schema, whole consituencies are normally taken for granted--African Americans and union memebers, for example. These voting blocs--it is argued--are comfortably and forever in the camp of the Democratic Party for, after all, where else can they go? But, as the increasingly angry Obama / Clinton contest demonstrates, this conventional coalition wisdom seems to be failing. Both candidates can claim some slices of the Democratic Party coalition, but are increasingly incapable of appealing to other slices. (Witness the endless parsing of the "inside numbers" gathered during polling.) And, as the contest drags on, the demeaning and degrading level of the campaign discourse is polarizing Democratic Party constituencies and hardening the lines of division. What are we to make of the alarming statistics that suggest large numbers of Clinton supporters will abandon the party for McCain if Clinton is not the nominee (the same goes for Obama supporters). Perhaps this is simply a reflection of the emotions unleased by the campaign and most Democratic Party members will return to the fold this time. But, does it predict future fights, and greater fragmentation going forward?
Both parties seem to be in transition, perhaps even slow-motion collapse. Given the economic and international perils going forward, it seems unlikely the Republican Party can maintain its cultural values voters, free-market and low taxes business class, and neoconservative hawks, in one large voting bloc. (The "financial community" to offer another example, is increasingly frustrated with the huge levels of spending required to advance the Neoconservative post-Cold War unipolar agenda.) For the Democrats, it seems equally unlikely--given the dilution of progressive politics--consider the influence of the DLC, triangulation, micro-trends, etc.--of an honest progressive policy aganda emerging and then being implemented. Perhaps both parties have simply become too big, too bloated with party professionals, and too burdened by internal inconsistencies, to offer effective leadership going forward. Who knows?
Ok then, end of random thoughts on a sunny Saturday morning here in Los Angeles.