The rise of the tea party movement has Democrats running scared. As Peter Roff writes on the U.S. News blog, "Make no mistake--the Tea Parties are a threat to Obamaism and all it represents, which is why Democratic operatives and their allies are working so hard to discredit the movement since it appeared." That effort is reflected in last week's attempt by some liberals to infiltrate Tea Party protests and polling data showing that 71% of Democrats view the Tea Party movement unfavorably.
Democrats shouldn't be scared of the Tea Party; they should celebrate it. The Democrats are going to lose seats in Congress this November but, thanks to the Tea Party, the losses are likely to be smaller than they might otherwise be.
Tea Partiers are certain to push Republican candidates to the right. In the Republican primaries, moderates will lose against more hard-line conservatives or be forced to take more conservative positions than they might otherwise like. Those more conservative Republicans and right-leaning stances will have less appeal to the independents and moderates who usually cast the decisive votes in the general election. Democrats will be the beneficiaries.
Look what's happening in Florida. Moderate Republican Governor Charlie Crist is running for the U.S. Senate but faces a strong challenge in the Republican primary from Marco Rubio, a far more conservative candidate supported by the Tea Partiers. Rubio currently leads Crist by 23 points in the latest polls of Republican voters and looks increasingly certain to be the party's nominee on Election Day. But that development is good for Democrats: Rubio is less likely than Crist to win the general election.
According to a recent Quinnipiac poll, both Crist and Rubio lead the presumptive Democratic nominee, Representative Kendrick Meek. Yet Crist's lead over Meek is substantial, 14 percentage points (48%-34%) while Rubio's lead over Meek is razor thin--only four points (42%-38%), just higher than the poll's margin of error. Rubio might still win the general election, but it will be a much closer race than if Crist is the Republican candidate. And nationwide, Democrats are likely to squeak out victories in a number of elections that they should lose.
Crist's supporters are apparently hoping he'll run as an independent if he loses the Republican primary to Rubio. Because of the Tea Party, we can expect to see a number of moderate Republicans mounting independent campaigns. This, too, helps Democrats. The Democratic Party will have an easier time winning three-way races in which the Republican votes are split than two-way races in which the Republican votes are united.
Even if moderates running as independents win some of those three-way races--as the recent poll suggests an independent campaign by Crist might--the victors will have less attachment to the Republican Party, which won't have given them the kind of financial support official nominees receive. Because of that estrangement and the larger disappointment of being effectively forced out of the party, those independents may be more willing to work with Democrats. That's essentially what happened with Senator Joe Lieberman, whose relationship with the Democratic Party has been on the rocks since he had to run as an independent after losing a primary challenge to a more liberal candidate. Lieberman's example should be a warning to conservatives.
Imagine what could happen in 2012 if the Tea Party remains strong. The Tea Partiers could show their strength in Republican primaries and caucuses and propel someone like Sarah Palin to the top of the Republican ticket. A Palin candidacy is likely to turn off independents and make it easier for President Barack Obama to win reelection. Or suppose the Republicans manage to nominate a centrist candidate but that inspires an independent candidacy from Palin or some other Tea Party conservative. That would also help Obama's reelection bid. The Tea Party candidate would steal a potentially sizable percentage of the Republican vote and make it easier for Obama to take the electoral votes in closely divided states like Florida, Michigan, and Ohio with only a plurality of support. Bill Clinton won the 1992 campaign with only a plurality of the popular votes thanks to Ross Perot, who siphoned off a sizeable chunk of votes that might have gone to the first President Bush.
One reason Democrats are so fearful of the Tea Party movement is its size. Up to 24% of the electorate self-identifies as Tea Partiers. Certainly any political movement of that size is worth paying attention to. Still, far more Tea Party supporters are Republicans than Democrats. In other words, the Democrats aren't losing many of their supporters to the Tea Party movement, Republicans are. The size of the defection from mainstream Republicanism makes the development that much better for Democrats. Remember what happened when a tiny percent of the liberal Democratic base defected from Al Gore and voted for Ralph Nader in 2000? The Tea Party movement is to Republicans what Nader was to Democrats, only super-sized.
Of course, some tea party Republicans are sure to win their races and Democrats won't be able to work with them on bipartisan reform. This could make it hard for Democrats to enact legislation reflective of their agenda. Then again, the Democrats have found that in things like healthcare and financial reform, the Republicans currently in office don't have any interest in working with them. So there may not be much of a marginal difference in cooperation and bipartisanship.
Tea Party "hero" Sharron Angle, who is running for Senate against Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid, said last week that the Tea Party is a "tsunami of conservatism across this country." Republicans may find that most of the damage caused by this tidal wave is to their own electoral chances.