The Republican Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania has announced he's jumping ship to to the Democrats. This is big news because it gets the Democrats closer to that filibuster-proof 60 seat majority (if/when Al Franken is seated, it's game over). Rahm will be bouncing off the walls. And it's Day 100 tomorow!
Specter is moving to save his political life. If he hadn't done this he'd have faced a bruising primary in his own party and then a probable defeat to the Democrats in the 2010 election. His state, Pennsylvania, has seen an increase in the number of registered Democrats (thanks, in part, to the titanic Clinton-Obama primary there) and a decline in the number of Republicans. The ones who have stuck with the Republicans tend to be the hardcore conservatives, who aren't impressed by Specter's moderation. So Specter is getting out while he can, thus leaving the GOP even more extreme (and one senator smaller) than it was.
There, in a nutshell, you have the reason that the Republican party is so screwed. To observers of the Labour Party in the early 1980s or the Tory Party after Thatcher, this is a familiar story. The moderates leave, so the extremists become more dominant, which forces out more moderates, which leaves the ship drifting ever further from the political mainland...
(Ps this is, amongst other things, a small triumph for Joe the Biden, friend of Specter and wily old dog of the Senate.)
(Photo: Doug Mills/NYT)
I think the point you make there is a point a lot of the GOP with their heads in the sand miss. To say there's a problem with the party isn't to say that they have to do a volte-face on their core principles- many of which a lot of people still firmly believe in. But they've been captured lately by the lunatic fringe, to the extent of nominating one for veep, and until the moderates wrestle control back, they've got problems. It's a shame because with their government - and most governments- due to run out of money to fling around even sooner than expected, there is a good solid case - as ever- to be made for small government and personal freedom. And no-one making it sensibly.
I feel the Tory party example is a little bit different... they didn't lose in 92 for lack of moderates (Major hardly extreme right), they lost because they were out of ideas. The moderates lost control after the party had lost power, not because of it. Rather the other way round in the US lately.
Posted by: ejoch | April 28, 2009 at 10:31 PM
in 97, even :)
Posted by: ejoch | April 28, 2009 at 10:34 PM
I think you put it very well, ejoch. I would just say, on the Tories, that the party was captured by its ideologues whilst Major was still PM (extreme Euroscepticism being their equivalent of pro-life!) which is why Major had such a hard time and lost the election so disastrously.
Posted by: Marbury | April 29, 2009 at 08:23 AM
Do you think though that the damage the eurosceptics did to major was just a reflection of his and the party's weakness? If he'd had a brilliant platform and fresh ideas, noises off wouldn't have been such an issue, is my thought. Like Brown now- MPs are apparently preparing to rebel on a huge number of things, because of his weakness. (the word 'bloodbath' was just used on Channel 4 news).
Posted by: ejoch | April 29, 2009 at 08:28 PM