Speculative trends

Kutuzov's big strategic insight was that it was more important to preserve the army than defend fixed places against Napoleon. Part of the reason the cheating allegations are being pursued is they keep the army of Deplorables together rather than scattering into the night.

— wretchardthecat (@wretchardthecat) November 11, 2020

Biden is not helped by those on his left, even those from the old establishment.  With calls for Truth and Reconciliation style hearings (Robert Reich), lists of enemies on the right to be punished (AOC), and reeducation programs (The Squad and many others), it is hard to sustain the idea that a Biden administration would be a Unity administration.

I am not sure that Wretchard the Cat is correct that this is an intentional strategy.  I suspect it is simply emergent order.  Regardless, the effect is much the same as outlined by WTC.

And it points to a different insight which I have been arguing some years.  There has been a great switch going on.  Forty years ago, the Republican Party answered to Finance, Law, and Big Business with a healthy representation of successful Main Street, dominance in a handful of states.  Democrats were the big tent party, Unions, City Machines, race groups, ethnic groups, Catholics, farmers, the poor, strong showing in all states.  

The reversal has been stunning though not complete.  The Republicans are definitely the Big Tent party in terms of diversity (fiscal conservatives rubbing shoulders with religious conservatives rubbing shoulders with social conservatives rubbing shoulders with law and order/defense conservatives rubbing shoulders with rural conservatives rubbing shoulders with traditional industrial sector executives rubbing shoulders with Hispanic conservatives rubbing shoulders with Blue Collar and Union conservatives, rubbing shoulders with Libertarians, etc.)  Republicans are necessarily now (post-Gingrich revolt and post-Tea Party) more responsive to a larger range of Americans than in the past.

The Democrats have become the party of the Mandarin Class, answering to the West and Northeast coast states, to academia, mainstream media, government unions, tech titans, a handful of big cities, an energized far left, and, for the time being, African Americans.  Their appeal has become far more selective.

A large diverse big tent party which is growing is great but hard to manage and the Republicans have a very weak central command and control system.  

The Democrats have a theoretically easier job given that they have fewer and fewer elements to their core coalition.  And they have a much stronger command and control system for the time being.  Not the DNC per se, but the fundraising prowess of Nancy Pelosi.  With Pelosi controlling the West Coast money and Schumer the East Coast, who needs the DNC?  There are two political coalitions within the party based on geography.

As a consequence of the Obama years when the Democrats lost more than a thousand elected positions across the country, they have a weak bench and not much of a pipeline of youthful leadership.  In the House, which Democrats control, Pelosi (Speaker of the House) is 80, Steny Hoyer (House Majority Leader), is 81, James Clyburn (House Majority Whip is 80.  With no natural replacements.  Pelosi has been extremely effective in suppressing internal competition to her position.  Schumer in the Senate, is a mere stripling of 69.  

On the Senate side, which they control, Republican McConnell is 78, Grassley is 87, and John Thune is 59.  On the House side, where they are the minority, their House Minority Leader is Kevin McCarthy is 55, the Minority Whip is Steve Scalise, 55.  More important by far is that behind all these leaders, there is a reasonably deep and continuous bench with members in their fifties and sixties.  Mitch McConnell would be hard to replace because of his deep knowledge and experience but otherwise it would be reasonably normal succession planning.  

From a cash perspective, Pelosi is markedly effective at raising money for her allies.  She is a money lynchpin for the party in a way that has no analog among Republicans.

While the Republicans will struggle with all the tensions of a Big Tent, those are mere political problems.  Demographically, geographically, in terms of talent pipeline and in terms of diversity of funding support, they are in pretty good shape.  Their major risk is a weak institutional center (RNC).

The Democrats are almost the opposite.  A strong financial fundraising pillar (based on talented fundraising such as Pelosi and on very deep pockets such as Tech) is holding everything together.  It is extremely dependent on a few individuals.  And even though it is a smaller tent party than it used to be, the schisms and interests among the remaining constituent groups are much more divergent from one another.  Bridging Fiscal Conservatives and Religious Conservatives is child's play compared to bridging far left Woke enthusiasts and socially conservative African Americans.  

Both parties face challenges and perils but I suspect the Democrats have a much more fragile risk structure than Republicans.  And the party with greater emergent order (Republicans) probably has a better chance than the party more dependent on command and control such as the Democrats.