The Middle Gains Weight

It's happening.

The frustrating non-choice between the two screaming extremes of fundamentalism and secularism is driving more and more citizens "front and center," and mainstream commentators are beginning to notice and talk about it.

First Matt Bai in yesterday's New York Times:

More voters now are refusing to join either party, rejecting the notion that either holds a monopoly on values. . . . Perhaps the party that builds a national consensus . . . will be the one that has the courage not to exploit moral choices but to wrestle with them.

And now Ronald Brownstein in today's L.A. Times (hat tip: Prairie Editor -- where's that blog, Barry?):

[T]he two parties that have defined American political life since the 1850s have been largely immune from the centrifugal current of the Internet era.

Joe Trippi, a principal architect of Howard Dean's breakthrough Internet strategy in the 2004 Democratic presidential campaign, is one of many analysts who believe that may soon change. The Internet, he says, could ignite a serious third-party presidential bid in 2008. . . .

The Internet could allow an independent candidate to more easily identify an audience and financial base . . .

Trippi believes an independent presidential candidate who struck a chord could organize support through the Internet . . . inexpensively. "Somebody could come along and raise $200 million and have 600,000 people on the streets working for them without any party structure in the blink of an eye," he says.

It might not be quite that simple. But the two parties are pursuing strategies that create an opening in the center of the electorate, even as the Internet makes it easier for a new competitor to fill it. . . .

[As the result of Bush-Rove's successful strategy], both parties are offering policies and messages aimed primarily at their core supporters.

Even strategists such as Trippi who support that approach acknowledge it could have a cost. By ceding the center, it might leave both parties vulnerable to a new force.

"We are now moving toward a very dangerous place for both parties," he says. "It is becoming much more possible for an independent or third party to emerge because they are leaving so much space in the middle."

Brownstein concedes that the obstacles facing a third-party candidate are still formidable, that such a contender could finish second almost everywhere, "trailing Republicans in the red states and Democrats in the blue." And yet:

[I]f the two parties continue on their current trajectories, the backdrop for the 2008 election could be massive federal budget deficits, gridlock on problems like controlling healthcare costs, furious fights over ethics and poisonous clashes over social issues and Supreme Court appointments. A lackluster economy that's squeezing the middle-class seems a reasonable possibility too.

And he envisions a possible winning ticket: McCain-Kerrey. (That's Bob Kerrey, of Nebraska.)

If the two Vietnam veterans joined for an all-maverick independent ticket, they might inspire a gold rush of online support — and make the two national parties the latest example of the Internet's ability to threaten seemingly impregnable institutions.

This may just be another case of Dems' haplessness at pickin' 'em. Kerrey's putative appeal to the center may be too weak to overcome his vulnerabilities on both the Left and the Right. As we saw in the last election, Vietnam is too treacherous and ambiguous to offer any candidate a watertight advantage. Kerrey's own Vietnam heroism has been shadowed, fairly or not, by his confession of taking part in the killing of women and children at Thanh Phong.

But plenty of us are ripe for a truly viable ticket, here in the radical middle. Mark Satin's definition: "By 'radical middle' I mean you listen to & genuinely learn from all political perspectives, and USE your learnings to address our fundamental socio-economic problems in creative new ways." His website of that name is an excellent source for centrist info, and I just learned from it that there's actually a novel about the rise of a centrist political party. Think of it as the anti-"Left Behind"!

- amba

UPDATE: The ever lucidly informative Joe Gandelman at The Moderate Voice is also weighing the question of whether bare-knuckle base politics will eject a fed-up majority center. He considers it an open question:

The bottom line is that in all of these matters [the Bolton nomination, Tom DeLay's ethics troubles] principles may indeed be involved, but the overriding goal seems to be to practice bare-knuckles, no-consensus take-no-prisoners power politics...to show everyone that the power is there and unstoppable to play bare-knuckles, no-consensus take-no-prisoners power politics.

American politics seems to have turned into a kind of spectator sport where the longtime values of of building consensus, fostering unity and accomodating varying interests have been displaced by winning without yielding. Your team must win because it is YOUR TEAM.

What will be interesting is to see whether all of this taken together confirms the school of thought that the U.S. has now shifted from an era where elections are won by whoever captures the most of the center to an era where whoever better activates their base wins. All indications are that the GOP powers that be have already written off large chunks of the center.

A key question then becomes: is the American political center dead, dying or will it grow and organize due to backlash from all of this? Is the concept of "the center" a relic of American 19th and 20th century politics? Stay tuned...

Also, in his ongoing mission to link to blogging that "truly lives up to the potential of what some thought blogs would be — a new medium of information that would provide solid fresh information done by citizen journalists," Joe links to an interview by Basie! with Jon Cowan, founder and president of Third Way, "a Senate-focused progressive advocacy group," advising progressives to come in from the left and reach out intelligently and sincerely to moderates:

Until progressives figure out a way to organize themselves and make a set of arguments that will connect with self-identified moderate voters in much greater numbers, we have absolutely no chance at building a progressive majority again. . . .

We’ve got to be positioned so that we are ready to pick up those moderate voters that conservatives consistently turn off. That means we need new ideas and new messaging that will work with those voters and protect our progressive values.

And to add to your Center blogroll:

Basie! is a college student at Pomona who's scoring original interviews with influential and thoughtful political players.

A Little Left of Centrist is a former professional musician and late-blooming father of three (two are named Harrison and McCartney, and the third is an adopted special-needs kid) in Indiana who values independent thinking in politics and culture.

UPDATE II: Centerfeud leads me to The Mighty Middle's "tantalizing notion" of "Political Free Agency" as the key to empowering the center. Michael Reynolds would like to see Senators who are out of place in their parties -- think Lincoln Chafee, think Joe Lieberman -- become political free agents, simply "the Senator from Rhode Island" or "The Senator from Connecticut." (Can't you see it? "Rick Santorum, R-PA; Edward Kennedy, D-MA; Joseph Lieberman, O-CT.") "Dream On," you say? Reynolds rejoinders, "Don't mind if I do":

Senatorial races all across the country would sprout third candidates. Republican, Democrat and Free Agent would quickly become the norm. The Free Agent candidate would be able to hold out the possibility of exercising disproportionate power for his state. . . . Senator Free Agent who could with a word cause mighty chairmen to lose their positions? That Free Agent would rule.

Half a dozen Senators from each party could bring on a revolution, end the rule of the extremists. It's a 55/45 Senate. Imagine, say, a 48/40/12 Senate. Imagine the power those 12 could wield. Imagine what it would be like if, rather than relying on mindless party loyalty, the parties had to go hat in hand to the pragmatists?

The Senate. The House, too. A third party in effect, without the daunting challenge of forming a third party.

The question is, who would have the courage to make the first bold move. I'd love to see someone with as much to lose, gain, and give as Barack Obama be the one.

Comments

[Rick (Centrist Coalition)]

There's definitely popular sentiment in the middle. But little organization or money. I just read Byron York's The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, which details how liberal groups raised hundred of millions of dollars for the 2004 election, with almost no results. You would think there would be some wealthy business people who would support a centrist revolt, but we haven't found them yet.

[gljunket]

Your site is a wealth of information, and encouragement, with which I strongly resonate! I'm a neophyte blogger who just started a simple AOL site to help me connect. Please check it out and comment.