Moorestown Democrats

Recently the Philadelphia Inquirer published an editorial about the increasing lack of bipartisan effort in Washington.  The editorial observes the obvious: "The two parties rarely agree on minor matters".  With national and international affairs at crisis stage, the two political parties, and their followers tend to focus on scoring political points, rather than colllaboratively solve significant problems.  As a result, we are stalled on much needed domestic issues such as financial reform and jobs creation.  The Inquirer continues to state "The crisis has grown worse partly because the more partisan voters in both parties have been voting out lawmakers whom they view as too cooperative with the opposition".  No question there.  The GOP is being challenged from the hard right, with various groups that could be loosely labeled as tea-partiers, but even these groups are somewhat fragmented and find difficulty in reaching agreement.  The progressive wing of the Democratic Party presses for more ideological purity as well, with recent challenges to Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas, and a few years ago, Joe Leiberman in Connecticut.  In Pennsylvania this spring, Democratic voters rejected their establishment party candidate Arlen Spector because he was not sufficiently "Democrat".

Probably more dramatic, and with possibly enduring consequences, are the intra-party challenges by the various tea party factions.  They find Republican incumbents, such as Senator Bob Bennett in Utah, who they deem as lacking ideological purity, and they muster enough of an effort to oust them, sometimes through conventional primary elections, sometimes through more arcane methods, such as party nominating conventions.  As a result, candidates, particularly Republican candidates, from conservative states are evolving to extreme conservativeness, with no apologies or consternation from those factions supporting these extreme candidates.  Today's best example is Sharron Angle as the Republican nominee for the US Senate in Nevada.  Prior to Angle's primary win, Harry Reid had an exceptionally difficult re-election effort in 2010.  Angle may be "ideologically pure" at least as defined by some tea-partiers, but has views that probably reflect less than 10% of the voters in the United States.  Perhaps only 15 or 20% in Nevada, at best. 

But where does this lead us to?  There are two consequences for these intra-party challenges, whether Democratic or Republican:  either lose in the general election, in many cases losing an opportunity for a party turnover, such as in Nevada, or be elected, and widening the divide even further.  Voters may be demanding a change in our legislative bodies, but by the tactics that many are asking for, the result may be a U.S. Congress evolving to further gridlock and unwillingness to compromise for any initiative.  As a result, the great middle of our electorate may end up being further and further frustrated with the lack of effectiveness and results of our Senate and House of Representatives. 

My prediction right now?  That the far, hard right factions loosely characterized as tea-partiers will win a few small victories, leaving them intoxicated with power, but with no real results.  A few conservative states will have even more conservative representatives to the House and Senate, but with no more ability to find solutions.  The only likely result is greater intransigence and unwillingness to work together, compromise and find solutions.  Along with a few victories, there will be lost opportunities.  For the Republican party eager for a symbolic victory by defeating Harry Reid in a mid-term election, they are likely to be sorely disappointed, and feeling a bit of buyer's regret with their dealings with the tea-party factions.