The center cannot be held

The only things liberals and conservatives can agree on in the wake of last Tuesday's electoral shakeup are that the Democrats did in fact win a majority and that people are upset with President Bush. Beyond that, there is no consensus between the two camps — or within them — on how we got here or how to proceed. "The netroots and Dr. Dean came through! Rahm Emmanuel and the DCCC are responsible! We lost because we weren't conservative enough! We lost because we were too conservative!"

I'm not sure how credible most of this Wednesday morning quarterbacking is. Democrats want to claim responsibility so that they can seize power within the party; Republicans are trying to avoid blame so that they can give direction to a rudderless organization. This obvious self-interest necessitates skepticism toward convenient claims.

I personally see three reasons for the outcome. The first of these is something I call the 49 percent doctrine, which I originally laid out while blogging the election for The Daily Princetonian. In short, this is the theory that pure opposition can get you at most 49 percent of the vote. You cannot win without some modicum of a positive agenda. The Republican campaign consisted merely of the mantra "We're not Democrats and they're bad," which is why the Republicans lost their majority.

The Democrats, however, were the ones who generally came up short in close races, losing 16 of 25 races decided by a margin of 52-48 percent or closer. This means there was no shift in the underlying political paradigm. The Senate is still split right down the middle, and the House is within striking distance for the GOP in 2008. A fundamental swing in the electorate would have given the Dems nearly all of those close House races and a majority at pre-1994 levels. By way of comparison, the 1993 Democratic advantage in the House was just 49 greater than today's majority.

Finally, American elections are almost always won in the center, and that was the case here. Sixty percent of self-identified moderates and independents voted for the Democrats. The center cannot be held unless the majority party gets things done, and the Republicans utterly failed to do that. On every major policy initiatives of this Congress the Republicans failed to achieve legislative victory. Our country is making no political progress and is mired in partisan rancor. Where Congress did act it was seeking to appease extremists, further estranging the middle.

There are lessons here for both sides. If the Republicans manage to regain the majority anytime soon, they should remember that power for its own sake is worthless to everyone except the politician holding the reins. Political power is useful in as much as it is a means to a policy end. When you stop governing for the sake of principle and start ruling so that you continue to rule and personally benefit, the voters will rightfully see you as corrupt and unworthy of leadership.

The past 12 years of Republican leadership also reinforced a truism: No political party is impervious to corruption. The Republican Revolution was fueled largely by the pledge to clean up Washington, D.C. Instead, many GOP lawmakers decided that what they really wanted was the good life. Democrats who campaigned on a "culture of corruption" would do well to remember that they aren't immune from the same disease.

Unfortunately, the Democrats are steaming into obvious obstacles. I hate to disappoint my liberal friends, but this isn't the time to overreach. Joe Lieberman's (D-Conn.) comment that both parties are on probation is spot on. According to a post-election Newsweek poll, the American people overwhelmingly fear that the Democrats will make too hasty a withdrawal from Iraq (78 percent), prevent the administration from doing "what is necessary to combat terrorism" (69 percent) and spend too much time on investigations for their own sake (66.6 percent). All of those numbers show a highly skeptical electorate. Opposition based on incompetence of execution means support for a course correction, not ignominious retreat, and some Dems don't understand the difference.

The good news for Democrats? Their more moderate proposals like a minimum wage hike or lowering Medicare prescription drug prices are supported by 90 percent of Americans. The country voted for restraint, not base-pleasing radicalism. Now that the center has shown it will not be held hostage by ideologues, I hope our leaders decide to pursue the goals we desire and not the ones we dread. Barry Caro is a sophomore from White Plains, N.Y. He can be reached at bcaro@princeton.edu.