Partisan Superfans are Driving Average Americans From Politics

Opposing sides are so vested in winning the battle that they’ve lost sight of the bigger war

September 2, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (55)

Marc Dunkelman is a vice president of the Democratic Leadership Council.

Public options and cooperatives. Subsidy thresholds and individual mandates. It may be democracy's greatest blessing that such esoteric concepts can spark intense debate.

Those attending town halls meetings around the country this summer might have thought that someone wearing a Yankees cap had just wandered into a Red Sox bar. Or that Michael Vick had just walked into a PETA convention. The most important litmus test in Washington today may be whether you are for or against the Obama administration's healthcare reform proposals. Politicians, operatives, interest groups, and pundits, all of whom picked sides months and years ago, have come streaming out in full fan gear, with buttons and fliers, facts and figures, talking points and charts. In turn, they have mobilized the nation's most engaged citizens—the volunteers and activists, petition carriers and bloggers.

But let's not kid ourselves: If you have your TiVo set to record Rachel Maddow, or you've altered your commute so that you can tune in to Rush Limbaugh, your mind was most likely made up well before the town halls began. You are what we might call a "superfan"—an ideologically committed voter with a vested political interest. By contrast, most of the nation's swing voters (think soccer moms and NASCAR dads) do not have time to follow each witty retort from right to left and back. To the extent that most have a general outlook on national politics, it is that both parties are too consumed with self-promotion to pursue the public interest. If anything, the health debate's nasty tone has simply confirmed for them that Washington is as broken as our healthcare system.

And that's the problem. The widest chasm in American politics is not between Democrats and Republicans or even progressives or conservatives. The nation may be most split between those who are intensely engaged in the national debate and those who are not. The truth is that health insurance reform is daunting for the average American, and it is incumbent on proponents to reassure the public. But the real effect of the town hall cacophony has been to deprive swing voters of an opportunity to consider what is at stake. No single version of the bill being considered by Congress remotely resembles "socialized medicine," whatever that is. In fact, on the "how socialist is this?" scale, even the broadest reform proposal would be less "socialist" than the current system for issuing driver's licenses. (I have to take a government-issued test!? I have to carry a government-issued ID!? What's next—federally mandated seat belts?)

Whatever your thoughts on the state of American democracy, the current debate will not affect the outcome of the healthcare struggle. Republicans, dead set on popping the president's balloon, were never going to help shepherd through a bipartisan bill. It is not in their political interest to set down the cudgel of partisanship. Nor is there any real question about whether Democrats will support a reform proposal at the end of the day. It would be political suicide for all of them—moderates and liberals alike—to see the president fail.

The casualty of the summer's rancor will be that more and more Americans will turn away from politics. And moderate Republicans, many of whom have it in their nature to work in a bipartisan manner, will feel compelled not to for fear of being crucified by the superfans in their own party. Chuck Grassley, a wily Senate veteran who has been at the heart of efforts to forge a compromise, admitted recently that the protests at town hall meetings had made him more recalcitrant.

The superfans on both sides have every right to mobilize. And no one should have expected that the debate would be polite: American democracy is not an Oxford debating society. But the focus on conflict and hyperbole, in the context of an electorate already disgusted by politics as usual, will only serve to confuse and befuddle many of the rest of the nation's voters, few of whom have the time, or the inclination, to read the legislation itself.

The tenor of the recent town hall meetings reminds us why it is so difficult to accomplish real change in Washington. If an industry as plainly inefficient and dysfunctional as healthcare is resistant to reform, less wasteful sectors of the economy have little to fear. The pattern that has persisted for the last generation—rank partisanship widening the chasm that separates progressives and conservatives—will deepen despite an electorate and a president who had hoped to mitigate the divide.

Reader Comments Read all comments (55)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Comparing Maddow to Limbagh is instantly and prima facie stupid. If you don't see any of the many things wrong with that comparison, there's really no need to speak to you. All that remains to be done is ignore everything you actually say and smear you blindly, as you seem intent on doing to the left.

To "rancor killed the public option" below: "only now are [dems] willing to compromise"...?!

Democrats do nothing but compromise. In every proposal, the democrats start with a proposal and continually lose ground until the republicans decide to stop whining.

The public option WAS the compromise - a pre-argument compromise. Knowing that you morons would never accept single payer, the mushy centrocrats took it off the table without a fight. Now they have to fight for what they actually wanted, and the squeaky wheel right will whine and shut down debate, and do nothing at all to help the american people. Republicans have only one position and they will never compromise - the poorer you are, the less you deserve to have anything.

F S of NY 9:10AM October 01, 2009

So, granmothers, grandfathers, Stay-At-Home Moms and Dads are now considered to be Partisan Superfans by the left? Interesteing. There are a few things you left out in your rush to put down real American displeasure and distrust of the current administration: All of these supposed "Partisan Superfans" were carrying home-made signs. These "Partisan Superfans" actually read the entire bill, unlike the members of the House and Senate.

Frank of MD 6:55AM September 10, 2009

Ron W. Smith of UT

You are right about the plain folk. But there are senators and other politicians that choose to be partisan or superfans are you including them as plain folk?.

There is a lot we do not consider or miss when we use labels but I get trapped doing that myself and I know better.

It is hard to understand all that we have to understand when it comes to voting and other political activities That is why I like the idea of everybody forming grass roots groups so we can get together to discuss and debate the issues. If our values and beliefs are strong we cannot be afraid of a clean debate unless we are afraid of learning and there is holes in our beliefs.

Boycotts can be affective as well and I like listening to the other sides so I have an idea of where things are headed.

Very good post you did a good job

Don D. Brock

Partisan Par"ti*san (p[aum]r"t[i^]*zan), n. [F., fr. It.

partigiano. See Party, and cf. Partisan a truncheon.]

[Written also partizan.]

1. An adherent to a party or faction; esp., one who is

strongly and passionately devoted to a party or an

interest. "The violence of a partisan." --Macaulay.

[1913 Webster]

Both sides had their partisans in the colony.

--Jefferson.

[1913 Webster]

2. (Mil.)

(a) The commander of a body of detached light troops

engaged in making forays and harassing an enemy.

(b) Any member of such a corps.

[1913 Webster]

Don D. Brock of AZ 11:54PM September 06, 2009

advertisement

Latest Videos

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

E.W. Jackson Proves the Tea Party Learned Nothing

By nominating E.W. Jackson, Virginia Republicans hope extremism will save them.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Are Not Obama Scandals

The word "scandal" doesn't appropriately describe anything going on in Washington these days.

Democrats Should Be Worried About Polls After Obama Scandals

Democrats should be more worried about President Obama's approval ratings.

Tea Party IRS Rally Should Wait Until After Moore Tornado Recovery

Tea party rallies against the IRS should wait until the tornado victims are taken care of.

God Bless America and the Boy Scouts

The Fund does the right thing by pushing the Boy Scouts to lift its ban on gay members.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Show the Failure of Obama's Big Government

Giving an inefficient organization like the IRS more responsibility makes it more likely to screw up, not better able to solve this nation’s problems.

Coburn Wants Oklahoma Tornado Aid Offset With Budget Cuts

Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn wants spending cuts before aid is sent to tornado victims in his own state.

Crowdfunding Zack Braff's Film And Robert Griffin's Gifts Is a Mistake

Rich people don't need donations from the public.

advertisement