Nathan Newman nails it:
I'm not annoyed like some at his "post-partisanship" message, since the best way to build a big partisan majority is to assert this kind of non-partisan inclusiveness. No, the concern is that the ideas and policies filling his "change" message actually connect with people beyond momentary distress to shape a real analysis of what's wrong with the nation.
Realignments are about much more than building new electoral coalitions. They are about changing the narratives that drive and define politics itself. By rejecting the traditional definitions of left versus right, realignment leaders recast the fight as new versus old, as progress versus the past. To those wedded to the old narratives the language will sound "post-partisan," but that's only because it is their understanding of partisanship that is at stake. The fight may not seem "partisan," but like every political fight it is. Rather than fight over issues, it is the political system itself that is at stake.
Obama's rhetoric may sound "post-partisan" right now, but should he win the nomination that will almost certainly change. Rather than a fight among Democrats about the future of the party, it will become a fight between the parties about the future of the nation. And at that point, the call to be "post-partisan" will transform into a call to build a new, lasting majority.
Realignments are processes, not events. To see what's going on here we need to look longer-term. Arguments are built over time, not born fully formed. And with apologies to RFK and G.B. Shaw, if normal politics is about seeing things and asking "why?", realignments are about dreaming things that could be and asking "why not?"
UPDATE: Here's the first bit of anecdotal evidence that we're in the early stages of a partisan realignment. Matt Yglesias:
Chris Bowers notes that self-identified Democrats were 76 percent of caucus-goers last night, barely changed from 79 percent in 2004. The dramatic increase in turnout, in short, did involve many new independents coming to the polls, but it was mostly achieved by mobilizing new self-identified Democrats
A realignment wouldn't be a realignment if new voters didn't openly affiliate in large numbers with one of the parties. Its not just about mobilizing new voters. It's about getting them to commit to a new party as well. In Iowa at least, Obama has done just that.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
