Fear not. Today’s Pennsylvania primary will offer absolutely no closure. Almost certainly, though, it will generate new levels of animosity within the Democratic Party.
But all good things must end. And the hand wringing by Democratic Party leaders over this nasty primary race is a needless waste of energy.
Democrats need only look to their counterparts for a constructive lesson on partisan unity. Republicans, after all, are a party that recently set aside policy disagreements — and principle — to bond in joyful partisanship.
Take, if you will, Rick Santorum, the God-fearing former senator from Pennsylvania. Just this week, he penned an unpersuasive editorial explaining why conservatives should line up behind Republican nominee John McCain.
Santorum, you may recall, mere months ago not only opposed McCain’s nomination, but declared that the Arizona senator was “not with us” on almost all “core” issues. “You can go on down the list,” Santorum added. On “economic issues,” he was “not even close to being a moderate.” On social conservative issues, McCain “took the floor of the United States Senate” to work against the cause.
Today? Santorum posits that the real “question for conservatives is whether McCain fits the Reagan Axiom that someone you agree with on 80 percent of the issues is your friend, not your enemy.”
Or one could argue that the real question isn’t whether you diverge with a candidate 20 percent of the time, but which issues you happen to diverge on. For many folks, a dispute over most “core” issues might preclude an endorsement. Not so for Santorum.
During the Republican primary, then-presidential hopeful Mitt Romney hammered McCain for being a wide-ranging nitwit on fiscal policy. McCain, Romney stated, had failed “Reagan 101” — which, if you know anything about Republicans, is tantamount to calling someone out for failing to wear a flag pin.
But wait. Romney has now changed his mind. McCain “understands” the economy, Romney recently stated, in the midst of a glowing statement on the veteran senator’s staggering genius related to all things monetary.
Even on immigration, where McCain took venomous criticism for co-sponsoring the now-infamous McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill, there is room for a group hug. Congressman Tom Tancredo has been one of McCain’s fiercest critics for years. In 2006, Tancredo claimed it would be “disastrous” for the Republican Party to nominate this maverick and that he would “do everything to make sure” that Republicans would be presented with better options.
Now, Tancredo is “supporting” — not “endorsing,” so please mark that down — McCain. “Sometimes I say to myself, ‘Can I really do this?’ ” Tancredo said, in what has to be the worst almost-endorsement in memory. “And then you listen to Obama or Hillary and say, ‘Yeah, I have to.’ ”
Santorum’s closing argument in McCain’s defense is much the same: “He’s not Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.” And if you’re a fan of limited government and economic liberty, yes, Obama and Clinton should scare you. As should McCain.
We all understand that in American partisan politics, consensus is built before elections. We can’t all get what we want. But at what point is being the lesser evil not enough for the party faithful?
Policy-wise, negligible differences exist between Clinton and Obama. Sure, one may be better equipped to answer calls at 3 a.m. while the other has a more transformational personality. But what’s really important to party elites is power.
And if Republicans can forgive McCain-Feingold, McCain-Lieberman, McCain-Kennedy — and probably McCain-Trotsky — surely Democrats will get over a little bickering.
Reach columnist David Harsanyi at 303- 954-1255 or dharsanyi@ .
