The Role Moderates Play this Midterm Election
How the center affects our elections
By Divya Sood
The Progressive Teen Staff Writer
I N TODAY’S POLITICALLY DIVISIVE CLIMATE, it is not surprising that nearly every news headline alludes to inter-party conflict of some degree. Even though most Americans reside in the center of the political spectrum, there is little talk about moderate platforms and politicians at the national level; yet, moderates play a crucial role this election in determining the fate of today’s polarized legislatures… and country. While many Democratic primary candidates have run very successful leftist campaigns, namely Ocasio-Cortez and Beto O’Rourke, the opposite approach has too evinced success: taking a centrist stance to appeal to moderate and independent voters. Moderate candidates all across the country are running for offices of all tiers and achieving substantial strides in their respective states:
Tennessee Senate: Phil Bredesen (D) & Marsha Blackburn (R)
Socially liberal but fiscally conservative, Governor Bredesen is focused on achieving substantial progress with regards to local issues via across-the-aisle efforts. While earning the support of his moderate constituents, many of his controversial claims, such as his support for Brett Kavanaugh as Supreme Court Justice, have not resonated well with progressive voters and Democratic party leaders; he naturally has also drawn criticism from the Republican Party for his Democratic label and support for progressive causes. Bredesen’s seemingly mixed approach and strong appeal to not only Democrats but also Republicans and Independents may, however, be requisite for a Democratic victory in Tennessee, a deep red state where Democrats have not won a Senate race since 1990. Even more, his potential victory would signify a precedent for office-seeking Democratic candidates in traditionally red states, where a leftist platform would unarguably limit success.
Missouri Senate: Claire McCaskill (D) & Josh Hawley (R)
An outspoken Senate Democrat, Claire McCaskill publicly embraces her deviation from conventional Democratic ideologies in her centrist approach. Resisting the adoption of hard stances toward controversial issues, McCaskill highlights her candidness as a politician, loyalty toward her constituents, and willingness to work across party aisles to achieve progress. As with Bredesen in Tennessee, such an approach may be a requirement for a Democratic victory in the red state of Missouri this Election Day.
California’s 48th Congressional District: Harley Rouda (D) & Dana Rohrabacher (R)
While Bredesen and McCaskill have adopted centrist platforms in traditionally red states, Rouda is replicating this strategy in California, a blue-concentrated state. Rouda has been a member of all major groups on the political spectrum: Republicans, Independents, and Democrats; filled with anger and frustration after the 2016 election, Rouda registered as a Democrat. Noting that in the 2016 election both political parties put “party first, country second, debating personalities and not issues,” Rouda has entered his first campaign this year, looking to defeat 28 year incumbent & ardent Trump and Putin supporter Dana Rohrabacher. Rouda has deliberately posed himself as a moderate, prioritizing his constituents’ local needs over his party’s and scraping for common ground beneath the intense partisan divisions that prevail today. Claiming himself as pro-business and pro-economy, Rouda simultaneously supports Medicare-for-all and re-institution of individual healthcare mandate.
Campaigning as a moderate in an immoderate world is challenging. How left is too left? How right is too right? How center is too center? By adopting left, center, and right views on a Democratic platform, such candidates run the inevitable risk of alienating progressive supporters and agitating party leadership as they build a groundswell of popular support across the political spectrum. Former congressional candidate Drew McGinty (former PA-7) reflects on his personal experiences to say it best: “[Democratic moderate candidates] have to have the courage to do that. It’s a different type of courage when I say that though. You have to be willing to go and have people be angry at you. You have to be willing and able to accept that not everyone’s going to like you. You have to be willing and able to accept that people are going to hate you. Even in your own party, some people won’t like you. You have to have a thick skin. Most of the party leaders in the party were more vicious to me than the Republicans.”
The outcomes in such races are even more unpredictable than usual; regardless, either a victory or loss will have significant implications with regards to the American political climate. While a loss, the byproduct of partisan divisions, will signify a step away from legislative progress, a victory will indicate that bipartisanship is achievable even in today’s polarized climate and establish a precedent for aspiring Democrats seeking office in similar areas. Having a few moderates in Congress could be what the Democratic party needs to retain its ideals of inclusiveness and unity. Even more, moderate politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, could be what the country needs for collective progress. As legislators, the moderates could be the mediators of congressional conflict. As legislators, the moderates could be the catalyst forces behind bipartisan progress. As legislators, the moderates could be the glue holding the party-divided country together. In other words, a tiny stroke of purple in a red-blue split country may be the panacea to the corrosive partisan polarization that dominates state and national legislatures alike.
