Pundits in 2016 and this year are noticing a difference between the two parties. I observed this strongly in 2016, but I’ve been paying too little attention this time. (2020 was too fucked to observe anything.)
In both 2016 and 2024, the R campaign had a real choice of candidates who were claiming to represent real differences in position. In both 2016 and 2024 the D campaign openly and obviously skipped all differences and kicked out all candidates except the heir apparent. Hillary openly cheated Bernie, wiping out his vote totals on TV. This year the D apparatus isn’t even pretending to hold primaries or debates.
I’ve been listening at bedtime to pundits from 1948, and the debate between Stevenson and Kefauver in ’56.
In ’48 the situation was identical to now. The R candidates clearly represented positions and regions, and the delegates negotiated to gain their goals, using the candidates as mere markers for a set of positions.
The D apparatus openly cheated, dismissing everyone but Truman and actively stigmatizing delegates who didn’t show personal loyalty to Truman.
In the ’56 D debate, Stevenson and Kefauver were NOT arguing about goals and policies. Each claimed to want exactly the same agenda. Only the voice and dialect were different.
I don’t think this is a permanent difference. Most of the time since 1968, both parties have been personality cults and absolute determinism. The 2016 R campaign was an abrupt departure from the norm, while D has maintained the post ’68 norm.
What’s interesting this time is that R seems to be continuing the non-deterministic mode instead of converging to the norm of rigid inheritance.
Polistra's Mill 