Blue Crab Boulevard

The Identity Trap

James Carville, not exactly known as Mr. Peacemaker in the world of politics, points out the problem that either Democrat is going to have reuniting the Democratic party once the nomination is secured. He does so in a little bit different way than many pundits have, ignoring the terms left and center and addressing the identity factions instead.

There are two main parts of the Democratic party. The first and fastest growing is what I refer to (somewhat uncreatively) as “Party A” Democrats. Party A Democrats tend to be urban or suburban. They are traditionally better educated, white, more affluent, heavily female, socially liberal and reform-oriented. Examples are candidates such as Adlai Stevenson, Eugene McCarthy, Gary Hart, Mike Dukakis, Paul Tsongas, Bill Bradley and Howard Dean.

The other side of the party is a more broad coalition of working class people who are generally less affluent, less educated and look to the federal government to soften the harsher edges of capitalism. They tend to be either urban or rural. I refer to them as “Party B” Democrats. They favour increased funding for federal programmes from Medicare to unemployment compensation to subsidised student loans. This wing of the party has included labour unions, older voters, African-Americans and non-college- educated young voters. Party B Democrats have been much more responsive to classic “I’m on your side” Democratic rhetoric. Candidates from this faction include Harry Truman, Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, Bill Clinton and (uncomfortable as he seemed in this ideological space) Al Gore.

One thing that struck me there was the number of losers Carville lists as examples. As in lost at the ballot box. Carville continues:

Underlying all of this is the inevitable game of electoral chicken that is almost certain to erupt at the conclusion of the contest. The winner, with help from the loser, is not only going to have to bridge the fissures within the party but also to find a way to re-embrace those racial and gender identity voters who now find themselves aligned with a new wing of the party. If Mrs Clinton wins the nomination, do the Party B African-Americans who have embraced Mr Obama’s campaign feel comfortable remaining in the party and voting for Mrs Clinton? Conversely, are the Party A, older, college-educated white women comfortable embracing Mr Obama’s candidacy after supporting Mrs Clinton so fervently?

Although he is phrasing it in terms of identity groups, he could as easily have said left wing or center wing of the party and the net result would have been the same. There is going to be a real division no matter how it is phrased, though. It will be interesting to see what happens in today's primary contests.

Politics | Gaius Tuesday, 6 May , 2008

By syn, Tuesday, 6 May , 2008 @ 5:09 am

Considering the terrible state of the educational system Carville is assuming there is a difference between the ‘ better educated’ and the ‘non-college educated’ when in fact those who enter college are now leaving college dumber than when they when entered.
By Neo, Tuesday, 6 May , 2008 @ 6:52 am

This must have something to do with Global Warming, else cooler heads would prevail.
By C Stanley, Tuesday, 6 May , 2008 @ 6:55 am

syn, I don’t think his analysis relies on those people actually being more intelligent or well-informed though- he’s using "educated" as another form of identity.
I think his analysis is spot on, andGaius is right to point out the number of losers that Carville mentions. Also, as has been noted elsewhere, the ONLY winners that the Dems have had have been the ones that appeal to "party B". That forms the heart of Clinton’s electability argument- and really, the only likely difference this time is the racial one because blacks who form a portion of Party B are now aligning with Party A. So then the electability question surrounding Obama is whether or not he’ll lose the white blue collar demographic- will enough of them defect to McCain to offset the advantage he has with blacks?
By Mwalimu Daudi, Tuesday, 6 May , 2008 @ 8:48 am

Somewhere once I saw a wonderfully snarky line about today’s self-anointed "educated" elites and how their education has gone to their heads without making to their brains.

Never forget that these elites gave us the welfare state quagmire, government-sanctioned bigotry (affirmative action), falling dominoes and genocide in Southeast Asia (and maybe Iraq, if Democrats have their way), global warmi-, ah, climate change religion, a defunct Social Security system, dependence on foreign oil, campus speech codes and thought police, diversity Nazis, a Democrat Congress, and other calamities of modern life.
By Attila (Pillage Idiot), Wednesday, 7 May , 2008 @ 7:12 pm

Not to miss the point of the piece or anything, but doesn’t Carville sound even dopier when his words are spelled in the British way?