Time for a Realignment? by David Brooks, New York Times
Summary:
David Brooks claims the unpopularity of Trump and Clinton is not what is making this election a transformational moment. Existing partisan mentalities are dying out and the current social divide will likely lead to some sort of party realignment in the near future. Brooks says "the molten core of the Republicans is the dispossessed" while the Democratic core consists of the "coastal professional class." These disparate groups have a huge trust gap in terms of trusting their neighbors, governmental institutions and surely the 21st century global economy. Those groups within each party, minority dispossessed Democrats and Republican professionals, recognize the molten core does not reflect their values, one can expert some party realignment. For example, the Sanders Democrats and Camber of Commerce Republicans will not stay with their party if the party leaves them ideologically. According to Brooks, this is likely given the fact the social, mental and emotional gap between the core groups will widen.
Questions:
Is David Brooks' bold claim accurate?
Can the Republican Party gain popularity with minority voters, especially if their message focuses on struggles in response to globalization?
Can the Democrats balance constituencies such as upper income professionals who have benefited from the 21st century global economy with the millenials who will graduate will record levels of student debt?
As the saying goes: Money Talks. If this is so, its a wonder that our current political parties have survived to this point. As Brooks discusses, these parties are an odd alliance between those of wealth and those without wealth, primarily focused on societal beliefs. This stability cannot last (as Brooks says) as people like millennials will eventually have to sacrifice their morals in order to achieve economic stability (as most of them have large student debt). I (like Brooks) see our current political parties changing to more align with economic than social interests.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with you in the claim that the current party structure, with people of different socioeconomic statuses in the same party, is doomed to fail. But do you really think that people will completely prioritize stability over social stances? I have a hard time believing that millennials will "sacrifice their morals" easily, especially on issues such as gay rights and abortion laws. With candidates such as Trump, we can see social interests begin to outweigh economic stances.
DeleteBrooks claim that existing partisan ideologies are dying out is true; however, the ideological divide between left wing liberals and right wing conservatives is continuing to widen. I believe that this will not lead to part realignment, but rather party dealignment. In both parties, there is unrest over the establishment having control over the party platform. As a result, I expect people to become less loyal to their party, but people will remain loyal to their political ideology (liberal or conservative). The two party system will continue to dominate American politics, but the extreme and moderate independent factions demographics will continue to grow and hopefully gain some influence over the existing two parties.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your stance that there won't be a party realignment but rather a party dealignment. This party dealignment can already be seen in recent years and elections, as more and more people are finding their political party unsatisfactory. I think that people are becoming more and more disillusioned with both the Republican and the Democratic Party. The link I posted below illustrates this increasing party dealignment.
Deletehttp://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/section-9-trends-in-party-affiliation/
Globalization, despite having greatly benefitted the consumer, has served to exacerbate income inequalities. Transnational corporations have grown to dominate an intensely competitive market. By responding to globalization and its negative effects, Republicans may be able to gain ground with minority voters who own small businesses and suffer due to the global market. However, in order to turn minority voters Republican, Republican policy makers must ensure they do not revoke any conveniences, such as low prices, that struggling minorities depend on.
ReplyDeleteIn the 2016 election, I think it would be very difficult for the Republican Party to win the votes of many minorities because of Trump’s racial viewpoints. These comments have deterred many possible minorities who could have considered voting Republican. While this many not be plausible in our current election, I do think in the future many minorities might switch over to the republican side, if they focus on gaining voters who feel alienated by the global economy. These voters may be more likely to vote conservative on these such issues and can be persuaded to vote republican if the candidates are mindful of the fact that they have to “drop the racial wedges,” as Brooks said.
ReplyDeleteIt's true that it would be challenging for the Republican Party to win minority voters at this point in time. It is mostly due to Trump's comments and opinions, but if the party was led by someone without his "bigotry and culture war tropes," as Brooks puts it, some of their policies could attract minorities. However, it is not only about the Republican Party winning these votes, the Democratic Party would also be losing them. This means that both parties would have to shift their policies completely, but since people are typically very stubborn about their opinions, this is not likely to happen, and even less likely to happen by 2024 as Brooks predicts.
DeleteLike Mollie said, in the future there might be some party realignment seen in minority groups because the candidates would become increasingly mindful of the voters. In the article Brooks claims that "In the years ahead, politics will no longer be defined by the hidden animosities of the Vietnam era, by the sexual revolution/culture war issues of the 1970s." which clearly explains that choosing a political party will be less of cultural division, but more of agreements in mentalities
DeleteIn some cases, Brooks' comments may be accurate, but others miss the mark. I think that his assertion that the parties are currently divided into two smaller groups that are polar opposites of each other in terms of socioeconomic status is accurate, but I don't think that his idea of the parties realigning based on that will end up happening. This is because I think Brooks is underestimating the value of stances on social issues, like being pro-life or pro-choice or being for or against someone marrying someone of the same sex, when it comes to deciding who to support. I think that these opinions are what's holding the groups inside of the parties together at this point, and if they weren't, we probably would have seen something like what Brooks was describing already. Evidence of this is that a very large percentage of Bernie Sanders supporters have gone to support Clinton instead of Trump (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/about-a-third-of-bernie-sanders-supporters-still-arent-backing-hillary-clinton/). If Brooks' logic applied here, Sanders supporters would be flocking to Trump, in an attempt to find the anti-establishment candidate they desired, instead of staying within party lines and shifting to support Clinton. I think that this is mostly can be attributed to the fact that although Trump may not be within the political establishment, his stances on policy pieces like immigration and gun control have turned them off. In this way, I think that the parties will continue to attract the people they have been attracting, even though the parties are still having to balance the two different groups contained within them. I just don't think that a party composed similar numbers of social liberals and social conservatives won't be able or will greatly struggle to create a policy plan that satisfies most of their constituents, and this is regardless of the socioeconomic status of the members.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that the Democrats will be able to balance the constituencies between the two different demographics effectively. The high income professionals are certainly not going to want to pay more taxes, and help pay for the millenial's college debt. This might lead to the high income professionals voting for the Republicans who favor lower taxes for the wealthy, instead of the Democrats. This could also lead to major splits in the Democrats between people wanting to elect someone more like Bernie Sanders, and others who want someone more moderate.
ReplyDeleteI think Brooks is accurate to predict a party realignment. As displayed through the 2012 election, both the Republican and Democrat parties were not afraid of taking sides on very polarizing issues. While in office, President Obama took clear stances on gay rights and immigration reform, instead of qualifying his arguments like previous leaders. This earned him record low ratings among older, conservative whites. As Ronald Brownstein points out, the party system in America is rapidly becoming a split between coalitions of "transformation" vs. "restoration." Read the article here --> http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/the-coalition-of-transformation-vs-the-coalition-of-restoration/265512/ Although it would be extremely hard, I think it would have been possible for the Republican party to gain some minority voters who resent the coastal elites. However, the 2016 election has halted this process, as Trump's extreme viewpoints have alienated almost every minority group. But as Brooks explains, it is simply impossible for parties to entertain interest groups of different economic classes. I think time (and better candidates) will show a real party realignment.
ReplyDeleteI believe that it is possible for the Democrats to balance the constituencies of the upper income professionals and the millennials. However, if the Democrats want to maintain votes from both these constituencies, they will have to redirect some of the tax money towards making higher education (college) more affordable for the average person. Although this would not make many upper income professionals happy, in the long run, it would benefit them by providing them with more college-educated minds that could boost up their companies.
ReplyDeleteI agree that democrats will be able to gain the votes of millennials with the offer of more affordable education. However, I do not think that the Democrats will be able to balance the constituencies between the upper income professionals and the millennials. For Democrats to create more affordable education, they will have to increase tax. The upper income professionals will not want to pay more tax because it will not directly benefit them immediately.
DeleteTrump’s support among lower income whites and Sanders’s success with a new generation of debt-laden college students could serve as an indicator for another political realignment similar to what took place between the right and left in the 1930s. Such a massive change would require either Republicans to gain traction among lower-income blacks and Latinos, or Democrats to replace their focus on race and gender with a Sanders-like emphasis on class. It’s not likely in either case, but the next decade will prove to be crucial in the shifting of our political landscape.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think this shift is not probable? Currently, the two parties are focusing on too wide of a demographic for everyone in the parties to stay content. Thus, some shift is going to need to occur in the near future to realign the parties with a more central idea system, likely based on economic class. As Brooks points out, a"crucial social divide ... between those who feel the core trends of the global" economy as beneficial and not is uprooting tradition and causing this shift between the Democratic and Republican demographics.
DeleteTrump’s support among lower income whites and Sanders’s success with a new generation of debt-laden college students could serve as an indicator for another political realignment similar to what took place between the right and left in the 1930s. Such a massive change would require either Republicans to gain traction among lower-income blacks and Latinos, or Democrats to replace their focus on race and gender with a Sanders-like emphasis on class. It’s not likely in either case, but the next decade will prove to be crucial in the shifting of our political landscape.
ReplyDeleteThe Republican Party should be able to pull minority voters in the future if they chose a more inclusive representative. These voters often feel isolated from the global economy and thus are more likely to vote conservative to protect their individual rights. If the Republican message focuses on struggles in response to globalization, there will likely be a shift of minority voters, especially because the democratic party currently has little to offer these voters other than the fact that their candidate is currently the lesser of two evils running in the election. This will lead to party realignment focused on economic stances rather than social beliefs, which is in agreement with Brooks' claim.
ReplyDeleteDavid Brooks is correct to predict that a major party realignment is due to occur in the near future and that the unpopularity of this years presidential nominees aren't the main factor in his forecast. What is hinting at a possible party realignment is the widening focus of the molten core of the Democratic and Republican party, that is both moving on to the globalizing information age and repelling the minority constituencies. What makes David's prediction accurate is that examples in the past have shown that party realignment often occurs when citizens are disaffected by the parties they support and an opposing party enacts a large scale change that swings voters to their side. In our current situation democratic less-affluent members of minorities and republican business executives may be switching allegiances in the near future as gaps in the ideals of the core of each party widens..
ReplyDeleteBrooks’ claim is accurate to an extent. Currently much of the republican and democratic parties do not align with their candidates views. With this distrust and unpopularity of both and Trump and Clinton, there is room for a third party to emerge. This third party will likely be composed of millennials, as their focus will be on economic issues such as their student loan debt. However, it will be difficult to form said third party with so many different social views. Therefore, the third party will likely be a compromise of moderate republican and democratic views.
ReplyDeleteI think it will be hard for the Republican Party to gain popularity amongst minority voters, as they will have to change a lot of what they stand for. However, Julia is right to say that there is room for a third party to emerge due to the fact that there are many people who don't identify with either of the two major political parties. A third party candidate, such as Sanders, appeals to a younger audience who wants to have a voice but does not believe either the Republican or Democratic party can provide that for them.
DeleteAs Brooks points out, the future GOP may pivot left on economical issues and sway dissatisfied liberal voters to the Republican party. The Democrats, especially Hilary Clinton, appeal to the upper class makes her unappealing to the middle and working class who are both unsure of the economy. If the GOP were to gradually move left socially and economically it would be plausible for them to gain support with minorities. Brook's claim about the realignment of the parties is also reasonable as historically there are many examples of this as well as how the policies for each party are beginning to represent other groups.
ReplyDeleteAs Brooks points out, the future GOP may pivot left on economical issues and sway dissatisfied liberal voters to the Republican party. The Democrats, especially Hilary Clinton, appeal to the upper class makes her unappealing to the middle and working class who are both unsure of the economy. If the GOP were to gradually move left socially and economically it would be plausible for them to gain support with minorities. Brook's claim about the realignment of the parties is also reasonable as historically there are many examples of this as well as how the policies for each party are beginning to represent other groups.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the Democratic Party will not be able to balance out its views and perspectives on new policies between the upper income professionals and the millennials because Democratic views have become increasingly more liberal over time. Because of this, the millennial generation has grown up surrounding themselves with much more liberal ideas than the upper income professionals, who grew up with more conservative stances when it comes to the Democratic party. This divide in perspectives will sooner or later lead to a disconnect within the party and no longer enable it to stay afloat. Although, some may say that the upper income professional generation served as an example for the millennial generation, the new ideas/stances formed within the millennial generation are unique within the generation and may not pass on to those in the upper income professional generation.
ReplyDeleteI think the Davids claim is very likely what is going on. However I believe that the possible realignment is due to the unpopularity of these two candidates. As David says, If the candidates of a certain party no longer reflects their views they will change the party with which they identify themselves with. The views of certain people or groups such as the coastal professional class, as David refers to, no longer have their views reflected by the party they once identified with. As the gap between expectation and a party's representation grows, realignment of political parties will only become more likely.
ReplyDeleteI believe that there is some validity to Brooks' claim, the Republican party has become increasingly unstable and unpopular recently and has been forcing republican voters to reconsider their voting choices. The rise of Donald Trump is just another testament to this, as the party is now divided over whether he is worth electing into office. However, it is hard for me to see (based off the major differences between republicans and democrats social views) the ability for the parties to swap completely. What may likely occur is in part a party reformation, as "Generation X" takes over from the Baby Boomers in the next Presidency. A new generation in the white house can help to modernize parties socially and continue to accommodate younger voters opinions.
ReplyDeleteI also do believe that a new party may form to better suit the new generation of voters. As seen in the success of Bernie Sanders, most young people are unhappy with the current political system and would most likely prefer to find a way to fix it. In addition, candidates are having a harder time adapting to the new ways of communicating, which is evident in Trump and Clinton's struggles to engage with young voters over social media. As the Generation X voters take over, so will a new party.
DeleteDavid's claim is valid in mentioning the gaps between professionals and minorities in the Democratic Party, and the repulsion of minorities from the Republican Party due to certain racial issues. In the future, it is possible and likely for minorities to join the Republican Party if the party changes their rhetoric and encourages more inclusiveness by focusing on global issues that affect the members they are trying to attract.
ReplyDeleteThe Republican Party can gain popularity with the minorities if they promise to make changes that the upper-middle class led Democrats are not willing to make. The best chance that the Republican Party has at gaining these votes is through Democrats who are not satisfied with Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton and are looking for a party that shares their views. With are current political representatives the Democratic and Republican Parties have a chance to steal votes from unhappy members of the opposite party.
ReplyDeleteThe republican party can increase support from minority groups. They can achieve this support by making compromises and appealing to minority groups without losing their main focus on their supporters. The big area where the republican party can gain support is from democrats who are dissatisfied with the Obama administration and from people who are dissatisfied with the representatives of the Democratic Party.
ReplyDeleteIf you truly think about it, there are no Bernie supporters leaving the Democratic party to the Republican party. Bernie Supporters when asked who they would vote for about "ninety percent said they back Hillary." Those who are upset with the Democratic party are not abandoning their party; and if anything is standing by its party.
Deletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/25/the-democratic-convention-is-chaotic-the-democratic-base-isnt/
I do agree that there are definitely tension between the different groups in the Democratic party. The National Convention this year was clear display of the divide between the establishment Democrats and millennials. However, I don't think that these differences could cause millennials to switch to become Republicans, unless of course the entire republican belief system made a complete change. As the situation stands at the moment, regardless of disagreements, most Democrats share in the ideals of strong national power, social reform, and putting money into social programs. These are all ideas that Republicans have opposed for decades. I think the Democrats definitely have some work to do to balance their upper income professional members with the millennials, but at their core these people share a basic agreement that the government needs to be involved in regulating and helping citizens. No matter how angry the establishment Democrats make these millennials, I don't believe they would ever become Republicans. They might join the Green Party or become independent, but the Republican party is simply too contradictory to their basic ideology.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brooks in that party realignment is coming, as the current parties are so polarized there is nowhere else to move. Once the extremities of the Republican party (Trump) are no longer relevant, minorities will most likely begin to join the republican party for their policies instead of fleeing to the democratic side because of the deportation threats and racism of the republican primary, Donald Trump.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that a realignment may be coming in the future. As seen in the presidential election, Trump won a lot of the rustbelt states, states that are usually considered bastions of the democratic party. One of the main explanations of this is that many people in these states have suffered a lot economically from job displacements and manufacturing going overseas, voters might have been appealed by Trump's message to bring back jobs and in some cases they might have been dissatisfied with their democratic counterparts for not taking enough action to preserve their manufacturing jobs.
ReplyDelete