The far left is already getting
angry over reports that Rahm Emanuel is trying to prevent the
Democratic majority's ultra-liberal wing from dominating the party.
One of the most interesting things to watch over the next two
years is how progressives who worked hard to put Democrats in the
majority will react should the party's leadership push a more
centrist agenda once in power. Conservatives who experienced the
agony of the GOP's descent into big government Republicanism
understand how easily power can change politicians, and the next
two years may prove just as frustrating for progressives. Though
they are now euphoric over Jim Webb's apparent victory in Virginia,
they may soon view him with disgust the way conservatives came to
abhor Lincoln Chafee.
Emanuel probably realizes that if the Democrats overplay their
hand by seeing this election as a triumph for liberalism, they will
only give Republicans fodder to run on in 2008. Let us not forget
that Netroots poster boy Ned Lamont got trounced in a state that
Kerry won by 10 points, suggesting that the type of pure
progressivism and vehement anti-war rhetoric espoused by the far
left will not be a winner for the Democratic Party.
Based on the conciliatory overtures that they have been making
in the aftermath of their victory, Democratic leaders may have
decided that their best bet is to govern as moderates even at the
risk of angering their base. Their calculation is probably that
even if the base gets disgruntled in the interim, when the next
presidential election comes around, progressives will be so
desperate to recapture the White House that they'll forgive a
wobbly Democratic Party.
Whether moderate Democrats will actually be able to maintain
discipline and rein in committee chairmen such as Henry Waxman,
John Conyers and Charlie Rangel is another story entirely. See also
Shawn's post below.