The real message of the US midterms? Know thy enemy

Two years into President Donald Trump’s second term, the country told him loud and clear it’s had enough. Will this “Watergate-level repudiation,” as Republican Senator Ted Cruz called it, summon repairs to America’s fractured politics? In a word, no.

Mending the fracture requires a new appetite for pragmatic centrism. This, in turn, requires Democrats and Republicans to quarrel with their own extremists, not just with each other. Midterms notwithstanding, neither side is willing.

Pragmatic moderation — call it squishy, if you like — is exactly what most voters want, but the idea dismays the most politically engaged. To be clear, it doesn’t assume consensus on the ends and means of public policy: There’s no such consensus. And it doesn’t applaud lack of conviction. The point is not to avoid disagreement, but to welcome it, accommodate it and make it productive.


Also Read | Democrats try out a strange new emotion at post-midterms What's Next conference - hope

In a healthy democracy, votes shift back and forth to provide a check on the people in power. When governments overreach or underachieve, as they always do, voters give the other side a chance to do better. This so-called thermostatic shifting works, as long as the distance between the thermostat’s two settings isn’t too big. If voters have to choose between excessively polarized alternatives, dysfunction ensues. Policies that demand commitment over time and stable execution — the policies that matter most — become impossible to achieve. Worse, rival sets of partisans devolve from disagreeing with those on the other side to detesting them.

This is where America now stands, and Trump’s richly deserved come-uppance won’t be enough to put things right. Democrats and Republicans aren’t yet ready to address the threat posed by tribalism. They’re still focused on the threat posed by true believers on the other side, not on the toxicity of their own true believers. Things will have to get worse before the political class gets its priorities right.

Also Read | What are US midterm elections, and why do they matter?

Is this too pessimistic? Surely the midterms prove that moderation is indeed what people want, and that moving to the center brings political rewards. Certainly, that’s how the results should be read. But are the parties open to such evidence, or simply recasting it to suit their preferred narratives?

At points in his post-election interview with CBS’s Ross Douthat, Trump almost seemed willing to learn — by his standards, at any rate. His hideously excessive approach to immigration enforcement had repelled large numbers of Hispanics, to say nothing of the median voter, dismantling the winning coalition he’d only just put together. Yes, he agreed, many people had found it “too tough.” Likewise, he acknowledged that his war with Iran had been a problem.

On the other hand, he said that was because of the war’s effects on prices, not because of its bungled execution or because he’d broken a promise to his supporters. He also said there was no alternative, the US had won, and he’d do the same again. In general, according to the president, the defeated Republican candidates were insufficiently MAGA. If only he’d been on the ballot. Shortly after the interview, he promoted Stephen Miller, the administration’s leading anti-immigrant fundamentalist, to be his chief of staff.

What about Republicans in Congress? Surely by now they can see that Trump might not be helping their cause — to the extent that they any longer have a cause, such as conservatism. If so, here’s a puzzle: They just elected their foremost MAGA fundamentalist, Jim Jordan, to lead their severely diminished ranks in the House.

On the face of it, Democrats are in a better place to draw smarter conclusions. Most recognize that the elections were more a rebuke to Trump than a vote of confidence in them. They see that conspicuously moderate candidates led the blue wave that swept across swaths of red America. Texas, for heaven’s sake. Mississippi, if you can believe it. By comparison, many progressives underperformed in safer Democratic states and districts. Could the case for leaning to the center be any clearer?

It couldn’t, but that doesn’t mean the lesson will be learned. What counts is how far the Democrats’ new and existing moderates will be able to guide policy and shape the party’s message to the electorate. Progressives will resist: They’ll insist they made an indispensable contribution to the triumph and say the idea they’re holding Democrats back is absurd. Energized and empowered, they’ll press their advantage, and moderates will have to back off to avoid splitting the party.

Georgia’s Jon Ossoff is a case in point. Re-elected to the Senate, he’s a popular moderate that many would like to see run for the White House in 2028. He’s adept at uniting a “big tent” of Democrats, partly by attacking Trump effectively — but also by refraining from fights with progressives over signature issues such as Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, and transgender politics. He’s understood to be a pragmatic centrist on these divisive issues, yet rarely if ever confronts Democrats to his left. His victory speech after the midterms checked off various anti-capitalist boxes — deploring “systemic corporate neglect” and the depredations of “Big Pharma, Big Insurance and Big Tech” — while avoiding specifics that might antagonize progressives.

Meantime progressives are seizing the moment. Sen. Bernie Sanders says he won’t back Sen. Chuck Schumer to lead the new Democratic majority in the Senate: Now’s the time to confront and defeat the party’s establishment. Progressive Sen. Chris Van Hollen has now thrown his cap in the ring, saying he’s “answering the call of the American people.” In the House, Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has no clear challenger as yet and looks more secure — but he’s under pressure to shed his cautious demeanor and pro-business instincts. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has endorsed him, after a fashion, but expects him to support her priorities. He’s promised “dramatic change.”

The US requires a stronger pragmatic center that puts utopians and fanatics firmly in their place. For this to emerge, both parties would have to demote their respective extremists, prefer compromise to defeat, and elevate results over empty symbolic victories. I hope it happens before 2028, but I’m not betting on it.