Democrats may look vague and disorganized and the Republican party, in contrast, cohesive and focused, but Nate Silver comes up with stats and charts showing that although the Republicans' narrowing ideology may give Democrats a hard time when trying to govern, Democrats may gain in the voting booth.
The Republican Party is dependent, to an extent unprecedented in recent political history, on a single ideological group. That group, of course, is conservatives. It isn’t a bad thing to be in favor with conservatives: by some definitions they make up about 40 percent of voters. But the terms ‘Republican’ and ‘conservative’ are growing closer and closer to being synonyms; fewer and fewer nonconservatives vote Republican, and fewer and fewer Republican voters are not conservative.
Silver looks at the "enthusiasm gap" in 2010 which was alleged to have kept Democratic voters home while Republican flocked to the polls. That worm is turning. In 2010, according to the numbers, "only about half of moderate or liberal Republicans were likely voters, according to Pew’s model."
That is about the same as the figure for Democrats generally: — about half of them were likely voters, with little difference among conservative, moderate and liberal Democrats.
This is why Republican politicians find it difficult to compromise on something like the debt ceiling, even when it might seem they have substantial incentive to do so. Republicans are still fairly unpopular — only about 40 percent of Americans have a favorable view of the party, which is barely better than their standing in 2006 or 2008 (although Democrats have become significantly less popular since then). As long as conservative Republicans are much more likely to vote than anyone else, the party can fare well despite that unpopularity, as it obviously did in 2010. But it means that Republican members of Congress have a mandate to remain steadfast to the conservatives who are responsible for electing them.
So the enthusiasm gap did not so much divide Republicans from Democrats; rather, it divided conservative Republicans from everyone else. According to the Pew data, while 64 percent of all Republicans and Republican-leaning independents identify as conservative, the figure rises to 73 percent for those who actually voted in 2010.
But things are different in presidential elections. Even if Obama's ratings are mediocre at best, "Republicans will need all their voters to turn out — including their moderates — to be an even-money bet to defeat him."
In other words, by narrowing their base, Republicans have locked themselves into policies which may (and almost sure will) repel their moderates when it comes to choosing a president.
I keep thinking of Republicans as the My Lai (rhymes with "we lie") party, or the party that believes they have to destroy America in order to save it. A commenter on Silver' article writes:
So, what you're suggesting is that Republicans who hope to be re-elected in 2012 cannot actually do what's right for the nation, what common sense tells them must be done - but must instead vote in a fashion that reflects their low-infomation, ideologically insane base. They must destroy our economy, and the full faith and credit of the United States, in order to save their jobs - despite the fact their low tax, low regulation fetish created this mess in the first place.
So much for patriotism and love of country...
