Good morning,
Several of my more conservative, thoughtful friends have taken me to task for calling out lying and political posturing of the right without a similar acknowledgement of the unreasonableness of many on the left. They are, of course, right that the Republicans do not possess an exclusive on behaving unreasonably and acting irresponsibly while trying to increase their political position. Politicians lie all-too-frequently in their politicking for office and in their attempts to cast the other side in a bad light. And in this “traditional” destructive nature, the Democrats share complicity along with their colleagues across the aisle.
But what the Republicans have done is go well past what is merely political one-upsmanship to twist the political calculus to endanger our belief in facts and logic and endanger the very foundations of our democracy. While I believe it is time for us all to join hands to deal with the great issues we face as a country—and it will take both parties and broad political factions to do so—I am not optimistic. That said, there is little time for obstructionism from either side.
In any event, I thought it might be helpful to consider the four ways in which our political leaders have failed us, the first two of which are shared by our political class generally. The last two are what keep me up at night.
Legitimate policy differences
Political posturing
Acquiescing to the ideologically extreme
Perpetuating untruth that threatens our democracy and/or our health
Here is what I think of each of these and where I come out:
LEGITIMATE POLICY DIFFERENCES
Trumpism hasn’t only waylaid the Democrats’ policy agenda. It also has sucked all the oxygen out of the right. I think most thoughtful policy analysts, on both sides of the political spectrum, would concur that there is merit to arguments on the other side of the political divide. The conservative side of the ledger possesses considerable logical and philosophical heft—arguments that could contribute to better legislation but which are lost in the constant effort to derail change at all cost. True conservatives are not the enemy. One can disagree on policy, but there is still fundamental agreement on basic tenets of our democracy, economy, and foreign policy amongst the reasonable and moderate right and left. Trumpism, however, has recentered the debate on the more coarse and tribal instincts and away from real policy discussion.
The right has in the past been at the forefront of a robust foreign policy and strong national defense. They have had healthy ideas for the de-escalation in the Middle East and have resisted the vilification of Israel (and has called it out in a way the Democrat leadership has not). It has historically worked to build alliances among free nations and trading partners that have helped keep the peace on a global scale (if sometimes failing on a local scale). It has asserted moral stances in the world against repressive regimes like China, Iran, and Russia.
The right (used to) be for fiscal discipline and keeping budgets balanced or as close to balanced as possible. And while they worked toward fiscal discipline, they didn’t abandon the notion that government still had legitimate purpose and a need to provide for those in need. The right demands a tax policy that encourages innovation and development, while maximizing revenue—getting rid of “pork barrel” programs, cutting government waste.
Many on the right support “intelligent” policing (fighting the more extreme elements like “defund the police”) and criminal justice reform. After all, isn’t the ultimate in “governmental control” prolonged incarceration without the chance for rehabilitation or parole?
There are legitimate concerns regarding the way in which American history is being taught. There are many who want to reshape its study to focus only on its racist past, deemphasizing its successes. The right has legitimate issues with diversity and ethnic studies curriculums, as they can become more of an indoctrination to a specific political agenda and less an academic exercise. The right has important views on maintaining free speech on campuses and in the public square.
But these legitimate areas of policy dispute, and others, get lost in the current “obstruction at all costs” positioning of Mitch McConnell and the moral bankruptcy of lies—about the election, about vaccines and personal liberty, and about Trump.
POLITICAL POSTURING
Both parties are well-versed in the means of obstructing the agenda of the other. The media should be calling out the absurdity on both sides of holding up legitimate executive appointments (including not only judges, but also ambassadors and mid-level positions in executive departments), the unreasonableness of not increasing the debt ceiling (the failure of which would eventually lead to defaulting on debt), and filibuster.
While I would say it’s a problem for both sides, I think the “block everything” strategy has been taken to its extreme by Mitch McConnell, who has succeeded in causing the Senate to abdicate its duty to have hearings on a Supreme Court nominee and has essentially put the Senate in an obstructionist stance that can’t consider meaningful legislation at a time we need our legislators to legislate. Meanwhile, Ted Cruz is trying to become the most obstructionist with the least justification. We have a woefully significant number of State Department and ambassadorial posts (most of which would otherwise be approved by unanimous consent) being delayed by Ted Cruz, because he is demanding resignations in the State Department in a fit of political theatre (allegedly for the Afghanistan pull-out) that endangers our international relations, leaves important posts unfilled and wastes Senate time.
ACQUIESCING TO THE POLITICAL EXTREMES
Both parties continue to struggle with activating their base while, at the same time, appealing to the vast middle. I would hope that the battlefield will evolve away from turnout (and voter suppression) and toward appealing to the middle.
There is an argument propounded by many on the right that the far left “owns” President Biden (who is, according to them, merely a front-man for the left). I find this argument curious, as it is one extreme end of the political spectrum calling out those who are similarly extreme on the other side. While the left poses its own challenges, they do not yet hold primacy on their party in the way that the Trumpist right has a stranglehold on the Republican party. The far right try to cast the Democrats as under the control of the left is in the vote on funding Israel’s “iron dome” defense system. But that concern seems unfounded, as over 90% of all Democratic House members (all but nine) voted in favor of funding. That said, I am concerned with the left hijacking the Biden agenda and resisting much compromise on the spending bill, which supports the notion that the left is directing the debate. Both sides need to stake out reasonable, more moderate, more achievable policy objectives. And they need to come out—publicly—against the more extreme elements of their base.
PERPETUATION OF LIES AND ENDANGERING OUR DEMOCRACY AND HEALTH
The crux of my argument—and the source of my worries and why I am so hard on the Republicans—is the abandonment of truth and a willingness to scrap constitutional and reasonable norms in order to keep control and placate the madman who is on a mission to dismantle our institutions and norms for his political and economic benefit and his enormous ego.
The place where the Republican party has left the realm of legitimate disputes on political policy and political jockeying and gone to places that pose us existential risk are two-fold. It is these unacceptable “bridges too far” that make the Republican party so unacceptable in its current incarnation:
The risk to democracy. The perpetuation of lies begun by President Trump in order to rally the base. But not only this, but the erosion of the constitutional protections and norms that have in the past constrained and controlled the executive. The constant lies about the electoral system, the voting machines, and those entrusted with maintaining and ensuring the sanctity of our elections are dangerous and destructive of our democracy. And don’t think that any number of recounts, lawsuits, or cockamamie “audits” like that in Arizona will be enough to overcome the crazy claims that “we won even when we lost.” Just look at the protestations of Arizona legislatures against the absurd audit that they themselves perpetrated and which found Biden more votes… Their goal is not to ensure the accuracy of elections. The goal is to ensure that legislatures can make the decisions in the future, based upon instinct, politics and suspicion—and not on demonstrable facts.
The risk to health and safety. Two things here:
The lies about masks and vaccination under the guise that “I’ve done the research” and stupid theories that our genes are being altered, or otherwise characterizing these actions as attacks on our freedoms are lies and dangerous. Equally dangerous is the perpetration of unfounded therapies about which less is known than about the vaccines.
The lies about the January 6th events and the false equivalence to other protests. The insurrection was quite different and, even so, this “tit for tat” is not relevant. The desire to honor these “patriots,” because it appeals to the base, even as it disagrees with the statements of the leadership at the time, condones violence and encourages the further arming of our society, is reprehensible. Fuutre political violence I believe is part of our future.
I am not giving the political gamesmanship of the left a “free pass.” There is plenty about the progressives to dispute. Ideological purity from that side of the aisle will thwart some of the more meaningful gains that can be achieved by the more moderate wing of the party today.
Trumpism must be stopped. And that means producing legislative successes in the next few years that make a difference. The far left would be wise to heed the words of Al Davis, former owner of the Oakland Raiders. He famously said “just win, baby.” Those words are true in politics. You can be ideologically pure but, in doing so, sacrifice the right to govern. First you must get elected (and continue in office) to effect change. It may not be as much as you want but it will be as much as 51% of your constituents want. And that’s good enough for today. Tomorrow is another day.
Have a good day,
Glenn
From the archives:
Thanks for articulating this chaos into a clear and concise summary; I will definitely revisit this insight as a go-to resource. Regarding your point about acquiescing to political extremes, I would add the Congressional approval rate is 28%, while the re-election rate is 92%. It seems the people who are truly engaged and vote represent the extreme views of their party, which forces politicians to become ideological vs. reasonable. Add the effect of social media and the sensationalist 24-hour news cycle/media vying for advertising dollars, it's essentially a colossal dumpster fire. We need term limits and campaign reform to entice honorable elected officials who care more about progress than power.