Historian Reeves daydreams of civility
Richard Reeves (has anyone else noticed his striking facial resemblance to Robert Mitchum?) thinks that with the election of Barack Obama- who has shown the instincts of a uniter at this early point in his adminstration- we may have reached the end of the era of "hyper-partisanship" which marked the Clinton and Bush eras.
Dream on, Mr. R. The merest chat with your average, run-of-the-mill Democrat will relieve you of any illusion that Mr. Obama will be even able to wean his own base from the partisan hatred that has been mother's milk to it lo these past eight years. And once any president actually begins to govern- to make controversial decisions with real consequences, and to justly merit being held accountable for the consequences- talk of a new Era of Good Feeling inevitably comes to a screeching halt.
"Governing as a uniter," alas, is an oxymoron under all but the most tenuous and temporary of conditions. James Madison managed to pull it off for a while. Other presidents have managed relatively high levels of popularity- but always by polarizing the electorate in such a way that a whole lot more people were on their side than on the other guy's.
True, what Reeves actually envisions is an era of bi-partisanship, in which government (rather than the body politic) is enabled to transcend the bickering and the division to actually get something done for the country. For this, we can only hope. Certainly Mr. Obama has signalled a willingness (surprising to those of us familiar with his career) to govern from the center, even at the risk of offending the ideologues responsible for his nomination (George W. Bush was almost single-handedly responsible for his election).
But getting the base to accept something less than the leftist legislative orgy so gleefully predicted by TIME Magazine the week after the election will be hard enough. Getting them to knock off the hate at the same time will be beyond the capability of any president. And with a base at once brimming with malice and frustrated that victory has not brought in a successor to the New Deal or at least the Great Society, I am skeptical about the degree to which the Obama administration will be able, in the long run, to govern in anything resembling a bi-partisan fashion.
Members of Congress do not get elected by ignoring the level of frustrated rage they will have to face in 2010 and 2012 from the party faithful back home.
HT: Real Clear Politics
Dream on, Mr. R. The merest chat with your average, run-of-the-mill Democrat will relieve you of any illusion that Mr. Obama will be even able to wean his own base from the partisan hatred that has been mother's milk to it lo these past eight years. And once any president actually begins to govern- to make controversial decisions with real consequences, and to justly merit being held accountable for the consequences- talk of a new Era of Good Feeling inevitably comes to a screeching halt.
"Governing as a uniter," alas, is an oxymoron under all but the most tenuous and temporary of conditions. James Madison managed to pull it off for a while. Other presidents have managed relatively high levels of popularity- but always by polarizing the electorate in such a way that a whole lot more people were on their side than on the other guy's.
True, what Reeves actually envisions is an era of bi-partisanship, in which government (rather than the body politic) is enabled to transcend the bickering and the division to actually get something done for the country. For this, we can only hope. Certainly Mr. Obama has signalled a willingness (surprising to those of us familiar with his career) to govern from the center, even at the risk of offending the ideologues responsible for his nomination (George W. Bush was almost single-handedly responsible for his election).
But getting the base to accept something less than the leftist legislative orgy so gleefully predicted by TIME Magazine the week after the election will be hard enough. Getting them to knock off the hate at the same time will be beyond the capability of any president. And with a base at once brimming with malice and frustrated that victory has not brought in a successor to the New Deal or at least the Great Society, I am skeptical about the degree to which the Obama administration will be able, in the long run, to govern in anything resembling a bi-partisan fashion.
Members of Congress do not get elected by ignoring the level of frustrated rage they will have to face in 2010 and 2012 from the party faithful back home.
HT: Real Clear Politics
Comments