Democrats have to decide: Are they about change or the status quo?
(Same author (Perry Bacon Jr) as this article: How media coverage drove Biden’s political plunge https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216944768 )
Democrats have to decide: Are they about change or the status quo?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/07/19/democratic-party-path-forward-centrist-or-progressive/
https://archive.ph/PiJfp
The Democratic Party is divided, with the Biden administration frequently stuck in the middle, on a wide range of electoral and policy issues. But these tensions often come down to a single question: With the GOP becoming more radical, should Democrats position themselves largely as the “normal” party? Or should they push an aggressive vision, as Republicans are doing, but from a liberal point of view? Right now, there’s a big opening for Democrats to run as the status-quo party because the Republicans have abandoned that space.
Traditionally, in countries around the world, there exists a conservative party whose political program is generally aimed at, well, conserving traditional norms, policies and hierarchies. This kind of conservatism is defined less by new policies than by a lack of them — the primary goal is to leave things in place, to oppose dramatic change. George H.W. Bush was arguably the last Republican president to clearly fit this mould. Other modern Republican presidents, particularly Ronald Reagan, weren’t trying to maintain the status quo but instead seeking to aggressively move the nation to the right — to not only stop liberal advances but reverse those that had already happened. Donald Trump’s aggressively right-wing campaign and presidency were the culmination of this approach. Trump was not looking to conserve anything.
This kind of disruptive Republicanism has unsettled many wealthy individuals, major industries and political figures who might otherwise either back the GOP or stay on the political sidelines. So a long list of prominent Republican officials, such as former Ohio governor John R. Kasich, backed Hillary Clinton in 2016, Joe Biden in 2020 or both. Employees at Wall Street firms, which donated more to Mitt Romney than to Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential race, contributed significantly more to Clinton and Biden than to Trump. Donations from people at Facebook and other Big Tech companies went overwhelmingly to Democrats. Moderate and conservative figures, such as billionaire and onetime Republican Mike Bloomberg, spent millions backing Clinton, Biden or both, as did other ultrawealthy people, like LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman and Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz, who previously weren’t that involved in politics.
And seeing this opening in the political center, many Democratic candidates, such as Rep. Abigail Spanberger (Va.) and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), ran in the 2018 and 2020 cycles effectively as nonpartisan figures. They emphasized their government experience and willingness to work with people in both parties more than their commitment to liberal policy priorities. Of course, it wasn’t just Trumpism that made the Democratic Party seem more hospitable to billionaires, former GOP officials and moderates. Under Bill Clinton and Obama, Democrats gradually shifted to become a business-friendly party that in many ways reinforced the United States’ economic status quo. That posture left the party conservative enough to win the votes of Republicans turned off by Trump. At the same time, many industries and wealthy individuals had shifted toward more multicultural stands, such as embracing same-sex marriage and more racially diverse workforces, that aligned them with the Democratic Party.
snip
= new reply since forum marked as read
