CHICAGO — One of the persistent jokes on social media among many Democratic activists is to ridicule the media with the meme “Democrats in Disarray.”
When Republicans fight, someone posts, “Dems in disarray.” When Trump attacks a fellow Republican, the “Dems in disarray” joke comes from various corners of political social media. When Democrats unite behind a unity ticket, “Dems in disarray.” You can see where this is going.
The whole “Dems in disarray” trope stems from an earlier generation of Democrats who regularly used the media to debate among themselves the right direction for their party, whether it was on policy or campaigning, while Republicans kept their internal disputes much more private. And when Democrats did air their disagreements in the media on a regular basis, it gave the sometimes exaggerated impression that the party was not as united as the GOP, simply because the GOP kept its divisions secret.
Follow live updates on the DNC
But since the Donald Trump era began, the GOP has been in a constant state of disarray. That makes sense, since Trump has attempted to reshape the GOP in his own image, an image that stands in stark contrast to the belief system of the more traditional GOP brand names of the past 30 years — think Bush, Romney, Cheney, Ryan, McConnell. Aside from beating Democrats on Election Day and cutting taxes, there’s not much Republicans agree on these days. There are massive divisions over trade and economic policy and more fundamental disagreements over the role America should play in global security. On character, the rule of law, and more, the party’s divisions are plain to see.
Perhaps the best example of this absurd level of public disorder on the right in the Trump era is the 2018 government shutdown. Despite controlling the House, Senate, and presidency, the party went into a government shutdown after the midterm elections. It is the only government shutdown to occur at a time when the government not divided by party. Of course, more evidence of “Dems in disarray.”
By contrast, the Trump era has made Democrats more cohesive and, in turn, more pragmatic and publicly united. The one thing that unites the party most is defeating Trump, and it can create clarity of purpose. When Sen. Joe Manchin and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can both endorse Kamala Harris in the same news cycle, you know you have a Democratic Party that, as an institution, is pretty healthy … at least for the time being.
For those of us who have been covering politics since before the turn of the century, it’s a striking change in how both parties behave. It was the Republicans who always had an order in how they did things; there was always someone who had a “turn” to be nominated — whether it was Ronald Reagan in ’80 or George H.W. Bush in ’88 or Bob Dole in ’96 or John McCain in ’08, both of whom had previously run for president and lost. The party was bigger than any one person; sure, Reagan was a north star, but he was never bigger than the GOP institution. Nor were Dole, Bush or McCain. Only with Trump did the party begin to organize itself more as a personality cult party, rather than an institution.
As for the Democrats, in the 1970s and ’80s (and even with Bill Clinton), they were always looking for their next personality cult — or, more specifically in that period, their next “Kennedy.” They wanted to fall in love the way the party fell in love with John F. Kennedy in 1960. This idea of finding the “next Kennedy” was so powerful that the single most important moment of Clinton’s 1992 convention was the debut of footage of a young, teenage Clinton shaking hands with America’s 35th president. It was a huge moment that positioned him as the rightful heir to leadership of the party and the country.
But the Democratic Party today is remarkably disciplined and very orderly. The party has proven itself to be greater than any one individual.
This convention in Chicago is a display of that institutional strength and discipline. Every living president speaks or is represented (Jimmy Carter’s grandson speaks in place of his ailing grandfather). In fact, a different president speaks each night: Joe Biden on Monday, Barack Obama on Tuesday, Clinton on Wednesday — and perhaps a future president on Thursday, with Harris.
Compare that to the Republicans. A Bush has not spoken at a GOP convention since 2012. Before that, a Bush family member had spoken at every Republican convention except one since 1956.
Trump’s 2016 honor was that he took time to honor “Mr. Republican” Dole at his convention, but only after Dole promised to endorse him. Trump has little respect for the GOP’s past. He has even said that he believes he is more popular and influential than Abraham Lincoln, the party’s first president — and if that’s his way of thinking, why would he want to glorify the past achievements of a Bush or a Reagan? “The party of Lincoln” is not a phrase Trump likes to hear uttered. He would rather hear “the party of Trump.”
And that’s the irony here. Now it’s the GOP that’s looking to its cult of personality to be its next savior (if Trump fails to be the savior this cycle). It’s the role Democrats played for much of the ’70s, ’80s, and even the first decade of the ’00s, until Obama came along.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Party has been quick to rally around candidates for two elections in a row. In 2020, shortly after Biden won his first primary, party elites quickly rallied behind him in an attempt to halt the primary campaign and avoid a long, drawn-out battle with the progressive wing’s champion at the time, Bernie Sanders.
And just 29 days ago, the party did it again, quickly rallying behind Harris and drowning out any major disagreement after Biden left office, all in the name of defeating Trump.
Is this a party strength or a sign of the candidate’s weakness? In 2020, the fact that Biden needed the party to rally behind him to prevent Sanders’ potential nomination may have been a sign of things to come in 2024. But he did win in 2020, and the party has had more success pushing through its agenda by putting aside minor ideological differences to pursue larger goals, which is what made the intervention justifiable. (Remember, that legislation was supported by both Manchin and Sanders.)
That success may have made party leaders feel more comfortable doing it again, pushing Biden out of the race and quickly rallying around Harris. If Harris wins, it will be interesting to see whether she can amass more political capital than Biden did — or whether she will struggle as much as Biden did because of the manner in which she got the nomination. But winning solves a lot of problems and papers over a lot of potential divisions.
This is not to say that there aren’t divisions within the Democratic Party, and those divisions could cause real headaches and cost elections at some point. But for now, the divisions seem more like petty skirmishes than the Republicans.
At some point, this will end for the Democrats, and the internal strife will throw them back into “disarray.” But that moment will likely not come until after Donald Trump has left the political scene.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
