Many lanes on the road to the White House

Remember the old days, when political parties had ‘wings’?

|
Eric Thayer/Reuters
U.S. Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz attends a campaign event in Barrington, New Hampshire.

Yes, this US election cycle really is different. Never before has the road to the Republican nomination had so many “lanes.”

Remember when parties had wings? The Republicans had the Rockefeller wing and the conservative wing. Even the Democrats had a conservative wing of their own, back in the last century.

But here’s Doyle McManus of the Los Angeles Times describing “two parallel contests” unfolding within the Republican Party: “Lazy pundits sometimes describe these two wings of the GOP as ‘establishment’ and ‘tea party,’ but that’s not quite right. There’s not much of a functioning establishment any more, and the tea party has evaded definition since its birth.”

A “more useful description” of the situation, he wrote, is offered by Mark Murphy, a strategist for Jeb Bush. Mr. Murphy describes a contest between two “lanes”: a “regular Republican, positive conservative lane” for Mr. Bush, plus Chris Christie, John Kasich, and Marco Rubio; and a “grievance lane,” political home to Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump.

“Easy to tell which side Murphy’s on,” Mr. McManus quipped. But note that he endorses not only Murphy’s classification, but also his terminology: lanes.

Lane, originally “a narrow way between hedges or banks; a narrow road or street between houses or walls,” is a certifiably ancient English word. The Oxford English Dictionary’s first usage example goes back to 971 (yes, 10th century). Oxford’s first example of the automotive lane is from an American publication in 1926: “the so-called super-highway where eight or more traffic lanes are provided for....”

Fortunately the GOP race hasn’t reached eight lanes. But are there only two? In late January, NBC’s “Meet the Press” listed three: “the social conservative lane, the establishment lane and the Donald Trump lane.” A Washington Post analysis last March identified five – religious voters, tea party voters, very conservative voters, moderate/establishment voters, and libertarians. In November the New York Times column “The Upshot” identified four lanes just within the GOP’s “conservative wing.” 

The lane analogy has its limits, though. Philip Bump, author of the Post piece, acknowledged: “We develop these lanes as a rhetorical device, but the lines between the lanes are not clear.”

Ah, yes. Drivers in Boston know something about unclear lines between the lanes. And how many lanes? You may think you’re in the correct lane to make a right turn, for instance, when the street suddenly widens, and some other driver slips around on your right. 

How to stay far enough over to keep from getting passed on the right is precisely the challenge that many Republicans have faced in recent years.

The New Republic has speculated, “Perhaps there are no ‘lanes’ at all, or perhaps the lanes function very literally in that changing from one to another is easy and appealing when the one you’re in is backed up.”

And after the early contests, some candidates will find themselves in the lane marked “exit only.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Many lanes on the road to the White House
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Verbal-Energy/2016/0211/Many-lanes-on-the-road-to-the-White-House
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe