It’s Almost as if Alienating the Majority of the Population is Politically Suicidal in a Democracy
Color me perplexed.
Look, I know that I am over 220 years old and may not be as sharp as I used to be, but I am having trouble comprehending today’s politics. If I understand correctly, the Republican Party has lost the popular vote in seven of the last eight presidential elections. The most recent Republican president never got higher than a 47% approval rating during his entire administration and lost his re-election bid by more than seven million votes. Furthermore, the party has won a majority of votes in a Congressional election only twice since 2006. Please do correct me if I am wrong, but it’s almost as if choosing to alienate the majority of the population is politically suicidal in a two-party Democracy.
Back when I was young, we had two major parties, too. One was the (now-)Democrats, and the other was the Federalists. The Democrats appealed to a diverse population, including demographic groups that were swelling in size. The Federalists appealed to a relatively-shrinking constituency of wealthy people and people who opposed extending the vote to those swelling demographic groups. The party died on the national level after getting only 31% of the vote in 1816.
Then, when I was president, we had the Democrats and the Whigs. The Democrats appealed to a diverse population, including demographic groups that were swelling in size. The Whigs appealed to a relatively-shrinking constituency of wealthy people and people who opposed extending the vote to those swelling demographic groups. As you probably know, I was the last Whig president, and the party ceased to exist a few years later.
Now you have the Democrats and the Republicans. The Democrats seem to appeal to a diverse population, including demographic groups that are swelling in size. The Republicans seem to appeal to a relatively-shrinking constituency of wealthy people and people who oppose extending the vote to those swelling demographic groups.
There seems to be a pattern here, but I can’t quite put my finger on it. . .
Wait! Could it possibly be — now hear me out— could it possibly be that committing your party to policies that appeal only to a shrinking minority of the population is actually a ticket to political oblivion if getting more votes than the other guy is how you, you know, win elections?
No, that cannot be, right? I mean if that were the case, then the Republican Party’s seemingly-conscious decision to alienate the majority of Women, People from Urban Areas, Suburbanites, Young People, Middle-Aged People, People of Color, Latinos, the College-Educated, Union Members, People in Urban Areas, and, generally, People Who Believe in Democracy and Oppose the Violent Overthrow of the Government may — just may — be an act of almost unfathomably reckless self-destruction. But surely no rational major party would choose to do that, right?
One final note in this regard: in 1856 I made the mistake of accepting the presidential nomination of the American (“Know-Nothing”) Party. It thought it could be the next major party by trying to appeal to WASPy working class folks and being virulently against, well, pretty much everyone else. Instead, I got 22% of the vote nationally, won only Maryland, and the party died a few years later. Now, I’m not saying that hitching your political fortunes to a bigoted and shrinking minority of the population is a short-sighted and stupid act of political suicide in a Democracy, but…
No wait — yes. Yes, that is exactly what I’m saying: Hitching your political fortunes to a bigoted and shrinking minority is a short-sighted and stupid act of political suicide in a Democracy.
Good luck with that.
