
Can Obama close the red-blue gap? Can anyone?
Is it possible to detoxify the discourse in 2008?
Sometimes simplest of arguments can reveal the deepest of divisions. Take the dispute between Senator Barack Obama and the Clintons over the legacy of Ronald Reagan. The Clintons pounced on Obama for presenting the icon of the red team in a positive light. “You’re not even allowed to say a Republican had an idea,” Obama lamented.
It all might have sounded like a parody of our constricted political discourse had the controversy not been so revealing of the obvious split in both parties on the eve of the largest day of delegate selection ever.
Call it a split between whether politics should be a pursuit of consensus or an effort to enact a party’s fundamental ideas, its core orthodoxy. Each party’s nominating fight boiled down last week to a choice between two candidates: one who argues for a politics that reaches across party lines and looks to identify common ground within the broader electorate; and one who states his or her first principle as representing the traditional party base by drawing firm ideological lines.
Where can Red and Blue America find political consensus? Which candidate is best equipped to bridge that divide?



