More on Internal Division in the GOP

Let's face it, the Republicans are just more fun to analyze right now. Democratic Party internal strife is largely contained in the vote choices of a few key senators. But the GOP is wearing ideological conflict this fall like a snuggie (or maybe a slanket).

The conflict that we see between elites clearly has it's roots in the electorate. A new Washington Post poll finds that

Fewer than half of the Republicans and Republican-leaners surveyed by The Washington Post see the party's leadership as taking the GOP in the "right direction," down sharply from this time four years ago. About four in 10 are dissatisfied with the policy proposals being offered by congressional Republicans, and similar numbers see the current crop of GOP legislators as out of touch with their problems and personal values. Nearly a third say the Republicans in Congress are not standing up for the party's core values (data for the Washington Post Poll).

I don't think this is surprising. Four years ago, with Bush in the White House, Republicans had a leader to rally around. Without that natural focal point (or even ambitious congressional party leaders like Newt Gingrich in the 1990s) Republican voters are left to take their political cues from a diverse set of politicians – often chosen by which elite is getting the most media attention at a given time. Plus the economy is in bad shape so survey respondents are going to tend toward negative evaluations of all leaders. Still, it would be great to have a similar battery of questions asked of Democrats. Though a recent CNN/Opinion Research poll suggests that Republican voters might be slightly more doctrinaire than Democratic voters.

Chris Chocola (president of the Club for Growth) thinks that this ideological conflict is a feature and not a bug, "Competitive parties hone their platforms, test messages and policy ideas and foster and elevate dynamic leaders." We just get to watch the GOP work through that process very publicly in the echo chamber of the 24 hour news cycle and the blogosphere. Of course this publicity might make it more difficult for Republican candidates to tailor their positions to their districts. Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster cautions to Politico, "Part of my job is to recruit candidates, and I try to find candidates that fit districts. I never question anyone on social issues, and I try to pick candidates based on what a district needs." Of course, the Club for Growth has been quite visibly backing conservative candidates in primaries. Also, liberal donors might be walking down a similar path.

Americans don't really seem to like division. Also: more on Populism and the GOP in the New York Times.

On Issue Ownership & Afghanistan

See political scientists Patrick Egan and Joshua Tucker on issue ownership and Afghanistan in their essay The Hard Sell.

Position Taking in the Health Care Debate

The Senate begins the health Care debate in earnest today. There is no clear majority opinion on health care (remember to look at those margins of error) which is probably why certain moderates in the Democratic Party are having such a hard time committing to a position. For more see this New York Times article on the health care debate.



Also, Andrew Gelman reminds us that generally speaking, politicians have a lot of leeway in how they vote. His research suggests that the benefits to moderation for a member of the House are probably about 2% in the general election.

And some members do seem prepared to vote their conscious without concern for public opinion. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said, "I don't think about that stuff. I'm just -- I'm being a legislator. After what I went through in 2006, there's nothing much more that anybody [who] disagrees with me can try to do." And Michael Bennet (D-CO) seems prepared to vote for reform even if it will cost him his position.

The 2010 Midterms

Politico ran a bunch of stories on forecasting the 2010 midterm congressional elections recently:

10 most interesting showdowns in 2010

GOP tries to play 41-seat pickup

10 Senate seats most likely to flip

Economy key to midterm trends (by Charles Franklin)

Democrats can do well in 2010

Off-year elections offer lessons

Past may be prologue for congressional races

and

Some thoughts from Chuck Todd and friends on nationalizing the elections. Of course, nationalizing the midterms comes at the cost of tailoring campaigns to local conditions and might hurt the Democrats.

Also, wrapping up the 2009 gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia, Charles Franklin shows that voting, compared to 2008, was more influenced by rightward shifts in demographic groups as opposed to changes in electorate due to turnout. The analysis is completely graphical and very clearly argued, I urge you to check it out.

More on Top-Down Party Leadership

According to Politico, Barack Obama has worked hard to take over the Democratic National Committee. This is most clearly evident in the way that the DNC has embraced a portion of the expanded party that previously only had a direction connection to Obama's 2008 campaign. The RNC is engaged in it's own party building efforts.

With respect to the ongoing ambient factionalism that we've been talking about, Joshua Tucker argues that extremism within parties makes it harder to win general elections. Politico reports that these factions are "grass-roots energies that lawmakers and strategists can scarcely control." As previously discussed, the conservatives in the GOP are making Newt Gingrich out to be a moderate; something that most Democrats would probably find absurd.

Gingrich's core talent was finding Republicans that could win congressional seats. And remember, ultimately the face of the party is made up of the politicians who decide to run for office and right now some are arguing that the GOP is in a good position to recruit top tier talent.

Was this post a "tab dump?" Yeah, probably, but there is a lot of neat stuff going on in party politics right now – and only so many weeks left in the semester.

Is Lindsey Graham a Good Republican?

Political Wire reports on a resolution issued by the Republicans in Charleston County:

"Sen. Lindsey Graham in the name of bipartisanship continues to weaken the Republican brand and tarnish the ideals of freedom, rule of law, and fiscal conservatism."

On Heterogeneity within Parties

See Seth Masket on majority party dissent with respect to the healthcare bill. A better subtitle might be: what it takes to prolong majority party status -OR- how the Democrats didn't go the the NY23 route.

Also here's an article on Joseph Cao (LA-2), the only Republican to vote for the healthcare bill. More from Politico on party dissenters. Cao is very much not a dissenter in the mold of the so-called "tea-partyers" who have been making up the most interesting faction in the Republican party of late.

UPDATED: There was also some interesting Democratic dissent too from Dennis Kucinich and with the Stupak amendment.

Also Political Scientist Simon Jackman shows that Democrats voting against the healthcare bill in the House tended to represent districts where Obama received a lower vote share in the 2008 presidential election. The New York Times put together a useful interactive table on the 39 Democrats who opposed the bill. And of course, still more about the Democratic schism from Politico.