Yesterday, Jon Chait had a well thought out piece explaining why Democrats are struggling to implement a progressive agenda even though they retain control of Congress and the White House. Today, Michael Barone explains that Democrats are struggling because they're "abnormal".
This is similar but not identical to a point I've often made: that the Republican Party is the party of people who are considered, by themselves and by others, as normal Americans—Northern white Protestants in the 19th century, married white Christians more recently—while the Democratic Party is the party of the out groups who are in some sense seen, by themselves and by others, as not normal—white Southerners and Catholic immigrants in the 19th century, blacks and white seculars more recently. Thus it's natural for the Democrats to be more fissiparous.
Chait surmises that "Barone was probably just trying to find another way to work in his oft-stated belief that Democrats are a bunch of freaks disconnected from middle America." Well, there's actually a more disturbing conclusion to draw from Barone's argument, which is that people of different ethnic, religious, and sexual persuasions simply can't get along with one another. Which, in and of itself, goes a long way towards explaining why the GOP remains a shrinking, monochrome party, a kind of gated community where many people don't feel welcome.
At any rate, Chait also offers the more compelling explanation: "There is a structural assymetry between the parties at work, but it lies in the fact that Republicans draw all their economic support from business and back the business agenda, while Democrats draw support from labor and environmentalists along with business and must navigate compromises between the two." But why go with a compelling argument when you can just point your finger at someone and call them a freak?
-- A. Serwer
