Centrism, Centerism, and Polarization: Don't Expect Kamala Harris to Swerve to the Center

 Don't expect Kamala Harris to swerve to the center.  Why not?  Because she is already there.  One of the greatest fallacies of our time is that the Dems have shifted to the left of the American people.  Tis one reason why I find the term polarization to be so troubling.*  Not all parties have fled to the middle--just the GOP, which has moved further and further to the right wing, running against policies and overturning policies that have widespread support among Americans.  

Here's just one stunning example: the GOP has become pro-child labor. WTF?

On most major issues, the Dems are solidly in the middle.  On health care?  Yep, Americans want government to play a major role. ACA is popular which is why the GOP fought so hard against it. Abortion?  We know Americans don't support the radical GOP stances. Homophobia?  Americans are against it, and we could see that by how much the Dems talk about letting people love who they want. Taxing the rich? Ha.  No-fault divorce?  I am not going to bother looking up polling for that because ... duh.

Project 2025 is wildly unpopular, so much so that the GOP is now running away from it.  Good luck with that.  

So, what is the center of the political system?  Where the Democrats stand, even "hey, let's feed the kids" leftie Tim Walz.  Seriously, what is wrong with feeding the kids at school?  Anyhow, centerism is the pundit/media/whoever effort to try to get the Dems to compromise with the GOP. I illustrated it thusly:

 

To get all math-y, the Dems are at the median vote, which is where a party wants to be in the American political system.  The GOP wants to disenfranchise people because it can't appeal to the media voter--the whole #voterfraudfraud thing is such a tell--that the GOP is not anywhere near the middle.  Being halfway between, averaging the stances of the two parties, is centerism--that we need to get to being between the two parties.  Why?  Why should the Dems compromise on their values?  If the GOP stands for xenophobia and rounding up tens of millions of Americans, should the Dems compromise and stand for rounding up only a few million?  If the GOP wants to get rid of no-fault divorce, how should the Dems compromise on that?  Please tell me.  Compromising on IVF means what exactly.  How anti-trans should the Dems be so they can be halfway between where they are now and the GOP?  

Which gets to another dynamic?  If the Dems moved to be halfway to the GOP, they would then be asked what?  To move again to be halfway, to keep compromising their values and alienating their voters to get closer and closer to the GOP.  

The Supreme Court is now wildly unpopular.  Project 2025 is wildly unpopular.  Last I checked, the political science says for politicians to pick popular positions. Since the Dems are standing exactly where the public is, why the hell should it move?

Ah, I am old enough to remember Kamala Harris being criticized for being too moderate for the Dems.  Has she moved?  Perhaps a bit, but the American people have as well.  American politics is in part finding the center, and in part moving the public to where you want the center to be.  The GOP wants the public to move to the right.  Reagan was very successful at this (which is why he ain't anywhere close to "best president of my lifetime"), making government unpopular.  After a pandemic (well, not so much after since covid is still going around), many people greatly appreciate what good government does.  We see it in outcomes--the death rates are worse in states led by Republicans.  Policy matters!  And more Americans get it than don't.  

So, Kamala Harris picked a guy who was a reservist, comes from rural America, who not only has guns but shoots them very well, who coached football.  Who supports LGBTQ folks to be their true selves. Oh noes!!!  How radical!  Nope, not at all.  While the NYT wants folks to fear trans people, it just ain't so among the average Americans.  Walz is an authentic, very decent person.  No wonder the the WSJ and its ilk can't stand him.  Great choice, shows great judgment.  Unlike, say, JD Vance.

*  One last thing on polarization--no, it is not both parties spinning away from the center--just one.  But we are all now more partisan in the rest of our lives.  That liberal women don't want to date conservative men.  Oh noes, not fair.  It is not because the women don't want to argue about inheritance taxes or supply side economics.  Straight women and gay men want to date men who treat them as equals.  So, even in this, the GOP dudes have shifted away from the realm of the date-able because of what they have done and what they say.  Incels by choice?  Kind of.  To put it most extremely, women don't want to date Nazis unless they themselves are Nazis.  Which is why people are mystified by Usha Vance, as her Great Replacement husband espouses views that should cause women and women of color in particular to flee.

To sum up: the Dems have chosen the middle because it is both the right thing to do and the smart thing to do (the joy of heterogeneous coalitions may be that they force not moderation so much as empathy), and the GOP has pushed itself further and further outside the range of, yes, the normal American. Their positions are weird.