Republicans have the abortion issue.
Democrats care about racial and gender prejudice.
In both cases, it is a matter of principle.
Some issues in politics come down to deeply held moral values. Other issues can reach an accommodation through compromise. Does anyone think that a marginal tax rate on earned income of 37% is moral and just, but one of 38% is the work of the devil? Lobbyists care, some big donors care, and in the inside-baseball of D.C. partisan war, elections may be won or lost on whether a PAC gives or withholds money to a politician who "holds the line" at 37%. But the public doesn't care. Those issues are resolved by politics.
Some are not. Primary election voters of each party have issues that cannot be compromised because they are matters of principle. Compromise would infuriate some of one's longtime supporters. It would bring a primary election opponent or a third party spoiler in a general election. The abortion issue is this kind of issue for Republicans. Since the Dobbs decision, GOP legislators aren't choosing to tiptoe toward some politically advantageous compromise where the issue meets an uneasy middle ground. They are racing to fulfill the wishes of abortion opponents, and in red states are successful in doing so. Democrats use the issue to characterize Republicans as extreme.
The Democratic Party is a coalition of interest groups that revolve around support for the underdog. They oppose prejudice against minority races, religions, genders, and gender preference. Climate activists defend the vulnerable climate, considering it to be bullied by the dominant culture of fossil fuels and industrial polluters. Support for these issues a kind of secular religion, based on their version of principle and science. Republicans have found words in the Bible to defend their positions.
Democrats have a drag on their support that is as profound as the abortion drag on Republicans. Joe Biden masked that problem for Democrats. He is as well positioned as any nationally-known Democrat to make a bridge to White working class Americans. Biden was "Scranton Joe," an Irish Catholic union-supporting old-school Democrat. But even Biden is not persuading White working class Americans. White men voted 56-39 for Trump, and non-college White men voted 66-32 for Trump. Rural White non-college voters voted 75-24 for Trump. Republicans succeeded in presenting themselves as the party of White Christian Americans. Accelerated by the election of Obama, they understand themselves to be under siege. They understand themselves to be outmatched by powerful, educated elite snobs from above and outnumbered by growing numbers of ambitious minorities striving for preferential status. Politically engaged Democrats do, indeed, consider racial and religious prejudice "deplorable," to use Hillary's word. They consider misogyny deplorable. They consider prejudice against homosexuals deplorable. Democrats cannot compromise on racism and other prejudices. Republicans call Democratic policy extreme.
A Republican may emerge who attempts a new policy on abortion, presenting a new orthodoxy. I don't see one yet. It may not be possible until Republicans lose landslide elections. A Democrat with standing and credibility to change Democratic orthodoxy will likely need to be a person in a persecuted group. At this point no one is challenging either Biden or Democratic orthodoxy. I don't expect Democrats to change anytime soon, either.
Note: For daily delivery of this blog to your email go to: https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]
22 comments:
Republicans abandoned any pretense of principle when they chose guns over children, elected a sociopath and refused to accept the 2020 election results.
A wise person once said, "If you don't like abortion, don't have one."
Republican men need a home arsenal of assault weapons to
defend themselves, their pregnant females and other offspring (the more the better). They should rename their party the American
18th Century Party or the American Primitive Party.
We've seen this play before in American politics with Adams and Jefferson both strong principled. Adams a self sufficient non slave-owning individual that defined his character and Jefferson a plantation-farming, slave-owning landed elite. Both had their followers and both divided the electorate to such a degree as to throw the determining outcome into the Congress for a vote. Our nation, in its infancy, survived. What is different now is the apocalyptic tone and rancor of the GOP-Trump faithful compared to the sideline-watching gaped-mouth Biden voting Democrats unwilling or unable to rally and unify. In a presidential election with no clear Electoral College majority the Congress will select Trump. Compromise is the wrong approach. Common vision and direction is the unifier. At the moment, it's economy, stupid.
When we all good well and there is a sense that anyone can make it, the American Dream lives. Unfortunately doing well is not what we feel at the moment in either political camp.
I'm not a member of any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.
Will Rogers humorist 1930s
I am a white male American who stood with the civil rights movement of the early 1960s. I sang, along with my brothers and sisters of all the other races, “Black and white together, we shall not be moved“.
Then, in 1967, something new emerged. SNCC kicked out its white members. Hostility towards white people started to become a common position, and the message of part of the movement morphed from what we had previously been singing together to “hate Whitey“. I stepped away at that point: fighting for justice is one thing; being willing to take racial abuse is something entirely different.
I haven’t changed any of my ideas about racial equality. We all deserve an equal chance at everything. But this new idea of “equity” with its demand for equal outcomes instead of equal opportunity, is not what I signed up for, and not what I will ever agree to. I have never wanted or asked for a one-up position; there is no way in hell I will ever accept a one-down position.
The Democrats could fix their problem with the white working class, but they would have to drop their demands for special privileges for all the other groups. If they don’t, they can kiss those votes goodbye.
Dear Anonymous, (anonymous 1? 2?) careful. Using your logic, it would be equally valid to say, ”If you don’t like AR-15s, Don’t buy one.”
Among other clichés…
I’m a working class, fairly well educated, white male, and I strongly support reparations to blacks and any other group which has been discriminated against. Magnitude of reparations correlative to length of time discriminated against
Kiss my vote HELLO
"fighting for justice is one thing; being willing to take racial abuse is something entirely different."
What a coincidence. There are peoples brought to this country against their will whose descendants have felt that way for hundreds of years.
Your column raises the question of whether the Democratic Party's commitment to racial and gender equity dooms its chances with white working-class men. I'd like to think it doesn't. Trigoboff's response--still peddling his unshakably confused notion of what equity is--with its tone of grievance and resentment makes me think it may. But I'm not sure he is the best representative of white working-class men. I still think that a recommitment to economic opportunity and justice by Democrats can win back many of those who defected during the era of the Clintons and Obama. Biden is not, I think, an anomaly now. Indeed, it was folks like Sanders and Warren who pushed him farether to the left economically than, during the 2020 campaign, he seemed willing to go.
Herb Rothschild says that my notion of “equity“ is “unshakably confused.“
Advocates of “equity“ have done things in the last few years like:
* eliminated testing for getting into high performance high schools, replacing those tests with a lottery because “not enough“ of their favored groups were getting into those schools
* colleges dropping the SAT and ACT tests because “not enough“ of their favored groups were scoring high enough to get into those colleges
* a movement to eliminate the bar exam because “not enough“ of the favored groups are passing it
How are these things and the many more like them not examples of the promotion of equal outcomes over equal opportunity? I don’t think I am the one who is “unshakably confused“.
If there are groups in this country who need help, I am not opposed to helping them; but not at the cost of weakening or eliminating standards of excellence. There are better ways.
Malcolm, are you willing to slip the standards of excellence to help groups that were discriminated against in the past? Are you personally willing to be discriminated against to promote “social justice“?
I suppose you might be, but I am pretty sure that most Americans will refuse to have any part of something like that.
Michael, first of all, where did you get the information you posted? I’m hopeful that most of jt is bs.
Secondly, what makes you think I said ANYTHING about standards of excellence or allowing myself to be discriminated against?
I stand behind approving reparations, a different animal. I’m thinking monetary reparations. I believe in hiring the best qualified applicants. I’ve seen what happens when unqualified people are place in positions they shouldn’t be. It can be very dangerous. (I worked for the Forest Circus!)a
A
Don’t you think we have an obligation to aid people whose entire economy, who’s way of life, whose families, have been destroyed by our country's despicable actions?
Malcolm said:
Michael, first of all, where did you get the information you posted? I’m hopeful that most of jt is bs.
Here are some references:
bar exam
elite high school admissions
elite high school admissions
colleges dropping SAT & ACT
Don’t you think we have an obligation to aid people whose entire economy, whose way of life, whose families, have been destroyed by our country's despicable actions?
Sure, but not by destroying standards of excellence, and not by discriminating on the basis of race. Racial discrimination, even if done with supposedly good intentions, is toxic and divisive. There has to be a better way to help people who need help.
What we see here is an example of White panic over our changing demographics, but all their whining won't prevent them from becoming just another minority. Get over it.
No, because AR-15s are dangerous weapons vs. an individual female exercising her inherent right to control her fertility, her body and her life. (ridiculous)
Michael, you still do t understand my goal: monetary Reparations. Nevertheless, I perused your links. Eliminating tests due to the covid pandemic doesn’t seem to match what you’re complaining about. And I see nothing about relaxing standards, only using a different set of actual standards. I agree with the student who feels cheated by getting turned down for college admittance due to a single test, when she had an excellent record of scholastic ability/achievement/grades: “ Emily was invited to apply based on her pre-pandemic academic record”
I didn’t read every word of every article, Michael, but I never saw anything there about dropping tests in favor of lotteries. I did see a few references to dropping tests in favor of deeper evaluations based on-yes-merit, scholastic achievements, grades, etc. Is that that so bad, really?
Malcolm,
Here’s one from San Francisco that’s exactly about dropping a test for a lottery.
Dropping standards for minority students can actually hurt them
As to reparations, I think there are practical problems as well as political ones that make this approach unfeasible.
I appreciate the opportunity to have a calm, rational discussion about these things. Thanks!
I’m glad a judge ruled against the lottery system. As far as the second article, it appears that the issue is very controversial, and no conclusions were reached, though maybe I missed something, having sped read the article. If you think I did, I’ll reeead it more thoroughly. But YOU'D BEST BE RIGHT! 😠
Michael, I read and commented on those articles. My comments have not yet been posted. Perhaps Peter is taking a brief holiday.
Post a Comment