Mediaboss Marketing

We keep hearing from pundits, and Republicans and Democrats alike that last weeks electoral outcome shows that the American people just want the parties to work together and make government function again.

But this isnt quite right. Yes, a lot of Americans want more generic compromise. Democrats and independents want compromise. But Republican voters in particular dont want compromise.

A new Allstate/National Journal/Heartland Monitor poll finds that surprisingly few Americans who identify with either party think unified government under their own party would make their lives better. Instead, a majority of Americans thinks they would benefit more from Democrats and Republicans compromising more to solve problems in Washington.

But look at the breakdown, provided by Ron Brownstein:

The belief that more cooperation could produce greater benefits united groups that often diverge on political questions, including 53 percent of whites, 58 percent of non-whites, 66 percent of Democrats, and 53 percent of independents. The big exception: just 42 percent of Republican partisans said they thought they would benefit much from more compromise a reflection both of the resistance to Obama and the demands for ideological purity among many GOP activists.

This also popped up in a recent Pew poll. It found sizable majorities of Americans think Republicans should try to work with President Obama and that Obama should work with them. But here again, theres a stark partisan difference. 52 percent of Democrats and Dem-leaning independents think Obama should find common ground with Republicans, even if it disappoints them. But only 32 percent of Republicans and GOP-leaners say the same on their side, while 66 percent of Republicans say their leaders should stand up to Obama even if less gets done.

Theres an ideological imbalance here, too. Pew found that by 57-39, Republicans say their leaders should move in a more conservative, rather than a more moderate, direction. But Democrats say by 52-41 that their leaders should move in a more moderate, rather than more liberal, direction.

Its true that bipartisan compromise as a goal unto itself is often over-hyped as something the public supposedly wants. Still, this imbalance could have ramifications for the next two years as Congressional Democrats try to figure out the proper opposition posture to strike in the minority. As Brian Beutler explains, Democrats face

structural difficulties that make it harder for Democrats than Republicans to be a united, rejectionist opposition party. Their coalition includes many moderates; isnt overwhelmed by ideological liberals; is in hock to big business; and, unlike Republicans, is invested in the idea that government should function well.

All the above polling suggests the same. And as Beutler notes, this could make it more likely that Democrats, particularly in the Senate, fracture when faced with Republican proposals. On things like the Keystone pipeline, tax reform that lowers rates but doesnt produce any new revenue, or the inevitable GOP effort to roll back Obamas coming executive action shielding millions from deportation, you could see some Democrats peeling off and voting with Republicans. All of which means the presidential veto may become more and more important in guarding liberal priorities.

Originally posted here:
Sargent: Morning Plum: Democrats want compromise. Republicans dont. Thats bad for Democrats.