Midterm elections are often called ‘base elections’ because without the publicity and drama of a presidential race, most casual voters stay home. The key to winning midterms, then, is to mobilize as many of your committed voters as you can and to, if at all possible, demoralize your opponent’s base.
Tuesday’s elections demonstrated that the Republicans are succeeding on both counts and the Democrats are failing. In some ways, the Democrats are caught in a vise. The types of things they might do to fire up their base are not necessarily the types of things that Democrats in marginal districts want to support. The rising tide of opposition in the country isn’t well articulated or particularly issue-based. It’s more of a combination of disgust with what happened to the economy and what the government did (in some cases, was forced to do) in response which led to a widespread feeling that the government is doing too much and growing too big. The Democrats’ instinct is to do something big to show the voters that they’re working hard to improve their lives, but the more they do, the more anxiety is created. Moreover, most of our vulnerable members represent culturally conservative states and districts, which makes it difficult to fire up our base without tilting the polls decisively in the GOP’s favor.
This paradox is making everyone uncertain how we should proceed, but one thing should be clear. The administration’s agenda remains incredibly ambitious and aggressive. They plan on adding the financial reforms being debated in the Senate right now to the sweeping and historic health care reforms, and then moving on to tackle climate change, confirm another Supreme Court Justice, and then begin work on immigration reform. And they plan on doing all of that before mid-September when they’ll recess for the campaign.
So, we’re absolutely not going to shy away from big government or trim our sails because of the generalized anxiety it is producing. Since that is the case, we must find a way to demoralize the Republican base. For starters, nothing is quite so demoralizing as watching the other party successfully seat a new Supreme Court Justice in a lifetime appointment (remember Samuel Alito). The worst case is when your own party doesn’t even put up a fight (remember John Roberts and the Daily Kos/Obama flap). That argues for picking someone who doesn’t arouse much controversy (which isn’t necessarily the same thing as picking someone centrist). Of course, it’s irresponsible to think in strictly political terms when selecting someone for a lifetime appointment on the nation’s highest court, but it is one factor among many. If Obama’s nominee wins overwhelming support, it will be devastating to the enthusiasm of the Republicans’ rabidly anti-choice base. Of course, for that very reason, it’s unlikely that Obama can find a candidate who will win overwhelming support. If, on the other hand, the nominee arouses a knockdown-drag out fight, it will disproportionately fire up the GOP base.
We can extend the SCOTUS situation to other scenarios. If, as seems somewhat likely, the Financial Reforms are passed with large majorities, it will take a lot of the wind out of the anti-TARP, anti-bailout attitudes that are driving the Tea Partiers. With a good number of Republicans having to defend their support for the reforms, it will be difficult to push a national message on the issue.
A successful effort to pass immigration reform would shatter the Republican Party, but it seems very unlikely that the reforms will get beyond the committee level before the September recess. If I am right, the Senate will attempt to mark-up a bill in the relevant committees, and that will be where things stand when people go to the polls. Either they will have passed bills out of the committees that await action on the floor, or they will have failed to do so after having tried. Depending on details, the issue could cut a couple of different ways. Obviously, the goal should be to pass reforms before the elections, but if that proves impossible, the best outcome is for the GOP to visibly split on the issue, with several members voting with the Democrats in committee. The Republicans are fueled by their unity in opposition, which keeps their base united and happy. If we can break down that unity on the financial and immigration reforms, and on the confirmation of the SCOTUS nominee, we will splinter and demoralize the Republican base, which will become disgusted with a good portion of their own party.
So, in this case, the best defense is a good offense, but the offense has to be concerned with breaking GOP unity, which means that steamrolling best outcomes isn’t the best way to go politically.
As a progressive, this isn’t the advice I’d like to give, because I want progressive outcomes, not mealy-mouthed compromise. And, in most cycles, I think mealy-mouthed compromise is depressing to our own base and harmful to the party’s brand. But this is not an ordinary cycle. We don’t have the tools or issues or political will we would need to out-motivate the Republican base. Our best bet, then, is to divide them.
