DeMint, Lincoln, and the Perils of Progressive Purity Politics

March 24, 2010 RSS Feed Print

Meet Sens. Jim DeMint, Republican gadfly of South Carolina, and Blanche Lincoln, Democratic punching bag from Arkansas. For different reasons, they may well represent the new shape of politics in America.

To many of his GOP brethren, DeMint is a philosophically rigid irritant. A first-term senator, he had his political action committee rate all the senators from 1 to 100, assessing their conservatism (surprise—he got the only 100). And he won't support insufficiently conservative GOP colleagues who are facing primary challenges from the right. He also won't rule out endorsing third-party candidates if Republican nominees aren't conservative enough, repeatedly remarking that he'd rather have 30 real conservatives in the Senate than 60 squishy GOP-ers.

In another age, the behavior of such a backbencher would be irrelevant and self-defeating. You had to go along to get along. But in the era of instant communications, online social networking, and viral politics, he has established a power base independent of his party. He is a hero to the kind of grass-roots conservatives who view Washington as the heart of enemy territory. He has become the Capitol's highest-profile ally of the Tea Party movement, battling against what it sees as weak-kneed, Vichy Republicans and the predatory socialism of Obama Democrats. He is a leader in a purity movement that threatens to leave the Republican Party a regional, minority party, if a philosophically purer one.

For several years, Democrats tacked in the opposite direction. They cooperated with the good fortune of an increasingly toxic Republican president and party by supporting candidates whose profiles fit their districts' politics. In states like Arkansas, that meant conservative Democrats like Lincoln. This produced ideologically fractious majorities in Congress, but majorities nevertheless.

But these being Democrats, success has bred division, as the party's liberal base is restive over the slow pace of change in Obama's Washington and specifically over the fact that once in office, conservative Democrats like Lincoln don't start behaving like liberals. So they've embarked on a DeMint-ian quest for progressive purity. "It's time for a pound of flesh," MoveOn.org Communications Director Ilyse Hogue told Politico.

Lincoln is their highest-profile target. First elected to the Senate in 1998, she is a classic red-state Democrat, navigating a moderate legislative course in a state that is trending conservative. When she won her first term, 58 percent of voters self-identified as moderates, 29 percent as conservatives. When she won re-election in 2004, with George W. Bush beating John Kerry by 9 percentage points in Arkansas, 41 percent said they were conservative, and 45 percent were moderate. When John McCain won the state by 20 points in 2008, 45 percent were conservative, 41 percent moderate. Liberals have held steady during those dozen years at around 13 percent.

Already a GOP target in 2010, Lincoln brought further grief upon herself by embracing a healthcare public option before pivoting and retreating from it, moving straight into progressives' cross hairs. Along with Nebraska Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson (who has the good fortune not to be up for re-election), she became the face of villainous intransigent centrism, hesitant on healthcare and traitorous on the public option. "When it comes to Democrats, Lincoln is the worst of the worst," MoveOn.org complained in a petition enlisting a primary challenger. But while progressives tout an October poll from Research 2000 showing support for a public option, it seems to be an outlier. Two subsequent nonpartisan polls have shown substantial opposition not only to a public option but generally to the Obama health reform plan (for which, by the way, Lincoln voted).

Progressives got their wish this month when Lt. Gov. Bill Halter announced a primary challenge from Lincoln's left, touting the public option and riding a wave of national Net-roots love in the form of more than $1 million from MoveOn supporters. There's one problem: Few national progressives get to vote in the Natural State. "Never in the history of Arkansas politics has someone won by proclaiming that they're liberal," says Bill Vickery, a Republican political consultant who has also worked for Democrats. Indeed, a Rasmussen poll this month showed Lincoln running stronger than Halter against the likely GOP opponents, though still losing badly to them. Even if she prevails, a stiff primary will drain her impressive war chest. Either way, the most likely outcome of the progressive challenge in Arkansas is a new Republican Razorback senator. (Paradoxically, Vickery says, the Halter challenge could help Lincoln by letting her stake out the political middle.)

Tags:
Jim DeMint,
Blanche Lincoln,
Gene Taylor,
politics,
Ben Nelson,
John McCain

Reader Comments Read all comments (3)

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

If what is referred to as the base now has become only the extremes of each party and they are the ones who vote in primaries in the largest numbers, then the states that swing conservative will be left with a choice between someone who is more conservative than the electorate and someone more liberal than the electorate most likely the majority will vote in the final election for the person to the right of their beliefs keeping the seat republican. The same would hold true for liberals and the seats leaning liberal. This scenario leaves the majority of the voting public unsatisfied and either opening the door for a third party, centralist candidate or a disillusioned electorate who decide not to vote. With the history of third parties in the US I’m afraid we will end up with even fewer voters actually deciding who the “Deciders” are for our country. This is not a good thing for our country. A time of extreme politics leads to extreme measures and a house divided.

Geoff of MO 4:57PM April 14, 2010

There is a new party on the rise,! not a third party, the tea party will be able to change the type of candidates that will have to stand with the right side of the country !

jerrbarn of LA 4:09PM April 09, 2010

HE-HAWING JACKASSES -- AND OVERSIZED DUMBOS . . . either gotta LUV'em -- or face getting dumped by them

it would seem that the PURITY TESTS of BOTH PARTIES only serve the purposes of the most hardcore elements of the bases

oh wait -- the polarized FRINGES ARE the NEW BASES of the far left loonies & the hard right wingers

ULTRA-PARTISAN is the new norm in America . . . and y'all can kiss the hope of change for unfrozen gridlock in Washington BUH-BYE

cuz it's not happening in today's OVERCHARGED political climate

alas President Obama who ran as the great uniter is already going down in history as one of the GREATEST DIVIDERS

http://www.gallup.com/poll/125345/Obama-Approval-Polarized-First-Year-President.aspx

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_politics

of course Bush ALSO promised to be "the Great Uniter" and look where that got us . . .

perhaps those who have been deemed & branded as either being NOT liberal enough! or NOT conservative enough!! AND THUS PURGED FROM BOTH PARTIES - should UNITE to form a refreshingly new INDEPENDENT PARTY of SANER ALTERNATIVES offering more NORMAL VIEWS - that are more in line, in tune, & in touch with the MAJORITY of Americans - which have consistently been found to be just to the right of CENTER {ie fiscally conservative while trending to be more socially accepting}

but alas that would be asking too much of most of our elected sheep -- who seem either content or resigned to THEIR FATES - as they continue to labor under the misguided notion that THEY actually OWE something to "their parties" -- which in turn snobbingly ONLY tolerates THEM from a distance {like the socially awkward "relatives" at a family function} AND then ONLY when it's considered an absolute necessity to invite them in the first place

foolish little lambs -- when will they ever get the bigger picture BEFORE they are all slaughtered & their bleached bones left to gather dust in the wilderness

tiger lily of DC 7:04PM March 30, 2010

advertisement

Debate Club

Was 2011 One of the Worst Years for the U.S. Government in American History?

Experts debate where 2011 ranks among Washington's worst years.

Latest Video

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

May Unemployment Rate Dooms Barack Obama

With unemployment now at 8.2 percent, Mitt Romney is poised to gain ground with voters.

Planned Parenthood Pulls a Komen on Mitt Romney

Planned Parenthood successfully targeted the Susan G. Komen Foundation and is now getting political by campaigning against Mitt Romney.

Bill Clinton Undercuts Barack Obama in Wisconsin

Former President Bill Clinton is campaigning for Democrats across the country, disregarding Obama's campaign strategies.

Barack Obama Doesn’t Get a Pass on Poland Gaffe

The president's error and half-hearted apology is a serious diplomatic mistake.

Mitt Romney's Ridiculous Unemployment Reaction

Romney's dramatic reaction to the May jobs report makes him look false and calculating.

What John Edwards Tells Us About the Legal Profession

The legal profession is experiencing a very serious breakdown of ethics.

What the GOP Should Do if Obamacare Falls

If Obamacare is struck down by the Supreme Court, the Democrats are responsible for proposing another plan.

Barack Obama and George Bush Show Congress How to Act Like Adults

Obama and Bush are capable of acting like adults. Why isn't Congress?

advertisement