It's Time for Democrats to Carve Up the GOP

The extreme mutual revulsion observable between Democrats and Republicans has led each side to caricature and misunderstand the other. As a result, both sides miss opportunities to gain tactical advantage. However, Republicans' willingness to abandon facts and destroy institutions is giving them the upper hand. For Democrats to regain the majority in Congress, they need to pay close attention to the reality of what divides Republicans and take advantage of the building resentment against the party's most extreme factions.

Here are some of the ways Democrats misunderstand Republican solidarity, along with recommendations for how to counter each myth.

Myth 1: Republicans are a monolith

It's very common to see people, especially highly-partisan online Democrats, express the belief that “all Republicans are the same” and that “no Republican will ever do the right thing.” And it's true that Republicans tend to stick together relentlessly, especially when pressured and under threat of primary challenge by President Trump or Elon Musk. However, there are at least three major factions within the party whose differences can be exploited. First, the Freedom Caucus of extremists — most aligned with Trump, Putin, Musk, and January 6th. Think Leninist revolutionaries like Steve Bannon. Second, generic MAGA Republicans and rural Christian Nationalists (think Koch). Third, traditional “low tax, fiscal conservative” Republicans (think Romney). While these groups do overlap and the boundaries are not firm, it is an error to suggest they are all the same — even as it is tempting and in some ways useful for Democrats to view them all through the same lens.

Recommendation: Carefully study factional divisions and differences in worldview between Republicans. Amplify and exploit those divisions, repeating again and again to achieve as many misaligned factions as possible.

Myth 2: It's always about greed, profits, taxes, corruption, and government contracts

Members of Congress get this wrong frequently — citing all the things that Musk and Trump are doing to destroy the country, and then (wrongly) conclude, “All so Trump, Musk and their billionaire buddies can get rich and profit from government contracts and pay less tax.” This is usually wrong on multiple counts.

First, Musk, Thiel, Vance, and their appendage Trump aim to dismantle the federal government, as we have reported here repeatedly. In failing to acknowledge this, lawmakers give media cover to avoid speaking this difficult truth as well. While some Republicans definitely do just want lower taxes and high profits, ascribing the same motivations across the board denies Democrats an opportunity to divide and conquer. The fact is that many Republicans do not want to fully dismantle the government, and failing to forcefully call out those that are attempting this gives them all cover to proceed unimpeded, even with misaligned goals.

Recommendation: Explain in clear terms that extremists are aiming to collapse the government, not profit from government business.

Myth 3: Republicans will never do something that harms them

This one is particularly pernicious. Democrats project their own ideas about what Republicans want onto their opposition — assuming it's always about hoarding dollars. While that's true for some of them, the most extreme don't believe that dollars are even real. Their goal is something different entirely: to end the dollar, terminate the federal reserve, and switch to gold and crypto-based monetary schemes. This is an entirely different worldview from that held by reality-based businesspeople who aim to maximize profits and their stock price.

This extreme, Ron Paul-aligned “End the Fed” view is also aligned with the goals of Russia and China, who wish to usher in commodities-based currencies globally. The idea that Republicans would suffer losses to end the dollar and shift to hard currency is well supported by history. As reported in Paranoia on Parade, the planned 1934 coup attempt against Franklin Roosevelt captured this mentality well. Robert Sterling Clark, heir to the Singer sewing machine fortune, said his real interest was in preserving the gold standard, and that he “had $30 million, and was willing to spend half of the $30 million to save the other half.” We see similar sentiments expressed today by people like Musk, Thiel, and other crypto-cultists who are fine with crashing markets and imposing irrational tariffs.

Recommendation: Target the divide between monetary policy extremists pushing for collapse and traditional businesspeople who desire stability.

Myth 4: It's all about religion, theocracy, and Christian Nationalism

The cracks here are easy to spot, yet the myth persists. It is beyond obvious that people like Musk and Trump have zero true religious inclinations, yet they are happy to exploit Christian factions for their own purposes. Likewise, Christian factions are willing to look past the faults of Musk and Trump (and various other characters like the Tate brothers) because they are on “their side.” Regardless, Musk's faction's true goals (traditionalism, hierarchy, pro-natalism, Eugenics) align well enough with Christian factions for them to be useful to each other. Don't give either side cover by assuming their alliance is unassailable.

Recommendation: Don't lump them together, or just call out hypocrisy; find ways to turn Christian Republicans against secular factions by documenting and amplifying the real goals of extremists.

Myth 5: Republicans all approve of what's going on

Americans in both parties are becoming increasingly alarmed with the country's direction. Recent polls indicate that 84% of American adults disapprove of the Trump administration's defiance of courts, more Americans disapprove of Trump than approve, and 60% of Americans are unhappy with Musk's handling of DOGE. Administration policies, chaos, uncertainty, job cuts, and slashing of benefits are likely to turn more Americans against the administration.

Recommendation: Carefully monitor the emergence of disaffected factions, particularly among Republicans and in specific geographies, and cultivate such individuals as allies. A “common sense” majoritarian agenda can overwhelm extremist factions.

Check Your Emotions — And Actually Lead

Many people reading this will have reflexive reactions to some of the ‘myths’ presented above. That's to be expected; research shows that extreme polarization results in misperceptions about the opposition. The more we exist in online bubbles (in-groups), the more likely we are to project erroneous ideas onto the opposition (out-groups). This is simply how the human amygdala works, modulating our fight-or-flight response. Such behavior is counterproductive. The more we assume a scorched-earth stance and adopt the idea that those people would never be on our side, the more we, in fact, make it true.

Most Americans don't want to crash the economy, default on our debt, and destroy the government. This is the position of the majority. Democrats are called to lead by casting aside their revulsion and ruthlessly pursuing an agenda that unites actually patriotic Americans against those who would prefer to burn the country down. Data, research, and history suggest that such an alliance is possible.

Recommendation: Democrats should sponsor their own bill to eliminate the debt ceiling, and cultivate as allies the handful of Congressional Republicans who don't want to destroy the country. Force extremists to reject the bill, and make them own the outcome if they block its passage. Start now.

The question, in the end, is whether Americans, especially Democrats, can put aside their emotions and act rationally in the face of this existential threat. The clock is ticking. ■

Recommended Additional Reading

The Wide Angle: Crash the Global Economy? It’s Harder than It Sounds. | Washington Spectator

Many of us are familiar with the phenomenon of “dorm room philosophy” and its derivative field, “dorm room economics.” Often, it is rooted in the clunky prose of Ayn Rand and the simple…

Washington SpectatorDave Troy

The Resurgence of the 70 Percent | Washington Spectator

The debt ceiling standoff revealed the presence of an interesting statistic, hiding in plain sight: 70 percent. The House averted financial disaster by passing a debt ceiling compromise with a vote of…

Washington SpectatorDave Troy

Radical American Partisanship

Radical partisanship among ordinary Americans is rising, and it poses grave risks for the prospects of American democracy. Political violence is rising in the United States, with Republicans and Democrats divided along racial and ethnic lines that spurred massive bloodshed and democratic collapse earlier in the nation’s history. The January 6, 2021 insurrection and the partisan responses that ensued are a vivid illustration of how deep these currents run. How did American politics become so divided that we cannot agree on how to categorize an attack on our own Capitol? For over four years, through a series of surveys and experiments, Nathan P. Kalmoe and Lilliana Mason have been studying radicalism among ordinary American partisans. In this groundbreaking book, they draw on new evidence—as well as insights from history, psychology, and political science—to put our present partisan fractiousness in context and to explain broad patterns of political and social change. Early chapters reveal the scope of the problem, who radical partisans are, and trends over time, while later chapters identify the conditions that partisans say justify violence and test how elections, political violence, and messages from leaders enflame or pacify radical views. Kalmoe and Mason find that ordinary partisanship is far more dangerous than pundits and scholars have recognized. However, these findings are not a forecast of inevitable doom; the current climate also brings opportunities to confront democratic threats head-on and to create a more inclusive politics. Timely and thought-provoking, Radical American Partisanship is vital reading for understanding our current political landscape.

University of Chicago PressNathan P. Kalmoe

Uncivil Agreement

Political polarization in America is at an all-time high, and the conflict has moved beyond disagreements about matters of policy. For the first time in more than twenty years, research has shown that members of both parties hold strongly unfavorable views of their opponents. This is polarization rooted in social identity, and it is growing. The campaign and election of Donald Trump laid bare this fact of the American electorate, its successful rhetoric of “us versus them” tapping into a powerful current of anger and resentment. With Uncivil Agreement, Lilliana Mason looks at the growing social gulf across racial, religious, and cultural lines, which have recently come to divide neatly between the two major political parties. She argues that group identifications have changed the way we think and feel about ourselves and our opponents. Even when Democrats and Republicans can agree on policy outcomes, they tend to view one other with distrust and to work for party victory over all else. Although the polarizing effects of social divisions have simplified our electoral choices and increased political engagement, they have not been a force that is, on balance, helpful for American democracy. Bringing together theory from political science and social psychology, Uncivil Agreement clearly describes this increasingly “social” type of polarization in American politics and will add much to our understanding of contemporary politics.

University of Chicago PressLilliana Mason

Did you find this useful? If so, please consider making a one-time contribution, or becoming a subscriber.