...the Democratic Party, the Party left me" Ronald Reagan is quoted as saying about how he came to be a Republican. Today, ironically, many of his followers have to decide whether they should try to reclaim the Party from Trumpist interlopers or leave it to form a new one. In the latter case they may have to fight over the Republican name or brand. No matter how things turn out, Republicans cannot duck responsibility for their predicament. The Faustian bargain they made with Trump, bad enough in itself, was the culmination of decades of increasingly divisive and regressive policy positions they embraced in the pursuit of political power. I don't know if some of them now question whether it was all worth it. We may find out in time. One has to wonder, though, how people who claimed they had the corner on family values, national security, fiscal responsibility and even morality (God?) ended up in bed with the likes of Trump. The answer, at least to some extent, is dogma. Republican politicians are not unique in taking positions they perceive as advantageous to them in the next election. What sets them apart is their refusal, increasingly over the past three decades, to consider compromise and their unquestioning faith in their own beliefs. Carried to its logical and extreme conclusion, this attitude meant that they went from promoting their beliefs in traditional legitimate ways to convincing themselves that they could do no wrong in the pursuit of those beliefs. It is summarized by the line made famous by Goldwater during the election he lost in a landslide to Johnson - "Extremism in the defence of liberty is no vice; moderation in the defence of justice is no virtue". That loss and the ignominious end of the Nixon presidency convinced many Republicans to let the ends justify the means. If the demographic changes in the US were unfavorable to their election prospects they saw nothing wrong with exploiting the secret fears of white voters. After all, they were the good guys, standing for motherhood, apple pie and the American way. Hence Reagan's thinly veiled appeals against "welfare queens" and other Republican initiatives like the war on drugs and three strikes laws. Hence also the all-out effort to stack the federal judiciary with as many Republicans as possible. Dogmatism means rejection of all compromise - half a loaf is no longer better than no bread, especially if you can figure out how to get your hands on the whole loaf. By the time Trump came along and openly said the things Republicans had been benefiting from hinting at for decades, they were too far down the slippery slope to stop him. Could this happen to Democrats? Sure; no individual or party is immune to the pitfalls of hubris. But Democrats' innate progressivism means a propensity for compromise and dialogue ("squishiness" in Republican jargon) as opposed to ideological purity (dogma). It is ironic that the circular firing squad Obama spoke of referring to Democrats is also now a Republican phenomenon. Middle-of-the-roaders can sit back and wait to see who is left standing. In the meantime, there is little question in my mind as to which party is closer to the middle of the road. It's not as if there is a viable third choice.
- drrama7