# What constitutes a party's "base"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 23, 2013, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122 "2013-01-23T17:22:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/1 "2013-01-23T17:22:59Z")
A friend and I are debating this on Facebook, and I was curious to hear Dopers’ opinions. Here is the relevant FB excerpt, with identities redacted: > [@](#): > > \*\*SlackerInc \*\*See, so my point is: you have every right to be disenchanted, even as I don’t share that feeling. But if left wing groups are going to grouse publicly about their disenchantment with the Obama admin, they lose the right to be considered the “base” and to be shocked–SHOCKED–when there is pushback to that grousing. > > **D----- W-----** I don’t know about that. Weren’t the hawks who sharply criticized Reagan’s overtures toward the Soviet Union, particularly in his second term, still part of his “base”? I’d wager he thought they were. What about the deficit hawks who attacked Bush for his lack of spending restraint? Aren’t they still part of the GOP base? > > \*\*SlackerInc \*\*I wouldn’t say so. But you seem to have a different definition of “base” than I do: apparently you consider them the most right-wing members of the GOP and the most left-wing Democrats. But for instance, check out this excerpt from a December 2012 NPR story on Boehner’s “Plan B”: > > > [@](#): > > > > For more on yesterday’s Republican meltdown, I’m joined by Republican Congressman Steve LaTourette of Ohio. He would have voted for Plan B if it had come up for a vote. He’s a strong ally of Speaker Boehner[…] > > > > LATOURETTE: [M]y sense is that if you’ve watched this Congress, there’s been 40, 48, 50 Republican House members that no matter how they try to accommodate them, they wouldn’t be accommodated. > > > > BLOCK: Well, those 40 to 50 people whom you’re talking about, you’ve called them before chuckleheads. Is that how you describe them? > > > > LATOURETTE: Well, they are chuckleheads. > > So to me, okay: this guy strongly supports Boehner, and probably supported Romney. So he and anyone who supports _him_ qualifies in my book as part of the GOP base. He’s calling these other Republicans–importantly, even though he needs their votes to keep a GOP majority in the House–“chuckleheads”; and no doubt those chuckleheads and their hardcore supporters call him a RINO and worse. They are not part of the base, they are the fringe. They may be needed, they may have to be tolerated; they even have to be given a place at the table if you want to at least try to get something done. But kiss their asses? No. He says, essentially, fuck that; and I and Rahm say the same about the chuckleheads on the left. > > \*\*SlackerInc \*\*BTW, just to be clear: I do not consider the DLC to be part of the base either. I would locate the true Democratic base as lying in the sweet spot between the DLC and MoveOn, a “silent majority” of the party that wrinkles its nose equally at Dennis Kucinich and Joe Manchin and considers someone like Amy Klobuchar to be “just right” (not necessarily on every single issue, but in general). > > **D----- W-----** To me, the base is composed of two main groups: 1) the people who hew most faithfully to the party’s principles, and 2) the people who do the legwork to get the party’s candidates elected. There is some considerable overlap between these two groups for both parties, and I think it’s fair to say that in the main the base of the Democratic Party is progressives and the base of the GOP is right-wingers. > > **D----- W-----** So, to my way of thinking, it is not LaTourette who is the GOP base. It is the members of his caucus who pushed back against what they saw as an unacceptable compromise of core principles. > > \*\*SlackerInc \*\*Your definition doesn’t fit the geometric/architectural origin of the word: something wide, balanced, centered. > > \*\*SlackerInc \*\*Oh, and most importantly: supportive of what is above it! ---
**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/2 "2013-01-23T17:38:56Z")
Well, in general, I’d define it to be ‘that block of voters considered most certain to vote for the party.’ Notice that they don’t need to voice support for the candidate/office-holder, or that they can’t voice criticism for him, as long as they’re not disaffected enough to make them stop voting for the party. So generally, in a two-party system, the base would tend to skew towards the right-wing or left-wing, because those people don’t have alternatives, as opposed to the moderate centrists, who might switch their votes if offered a compelling candidate or platform that hits their hot button issues. When third parties running extremist platforms are in the mix, it gets a little hard to pin down the bases. (And yes, even though bases are supposed to be stable, they can shift. It’s politics after all!) ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/3 "2013-01-23T18:04:59Z")
I actually like **D----- W-----**'s definition of the base as those people who do the most work to get the party’s candidates elected. If you look at the Tea Party-type Republicans as a whole group – not just the elected ones, but the rank and file – a lot of them will split on individual issues, even high profile ones. But at the end of the day, the substantial majority of them vote for the party’s nominee, no matter how much a thorn in their side they may be. So, someone like Jim DeMint, who has started a PAC to make mainstream Republican conservatives lose in primary contests to more Tea Party-oriented candidates. In the end, I’m sure DeMint voted for Mitt Romney. In my view, even though he does a lot to challenge Republican powers that be, as long as falls in line and helps to generate votes to win general elections for Republicans, I count him as part of the Republican party base… but not necessarily part of the Republican Party orthodoxy. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/4 "2013-01-23T18:30:36Z")
But what happens to that logic if these “base” voters support candidates in their parties’ primaries that are too far from the centre to win the general election? Doesn’t that mean they are not actually working to get their party’s candidates elected? ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/5 "2013-01-23T19:05:01Z")
> [@chrisk](#): > > Well, in general, I’d define it to be ‘that block of voters considered most certain to vote for the party.’ …if they vote. They’re not going to defect, but they may be unmotivated. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/6 "2013-01-23T19:18:15Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > But what happens to that logic if these “base” voters support candidates in their parties’ primaries that are too far from the centre to win the general election? Doesn’t that mean they are not actually working to get their party’s candidates elected? I think that calls into question their judgment, but not their political orientation and activism. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/7 "2013-01-23T20:20:28Z")
But doesn’t a group of voters need to be helpful, essential in fact, to a party to qualify as the base? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/8 "2013-01-23T20:24:44Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > But doesn’t a group of voters need to be helpful, essential in fact, to a party to qualify as the base? The base doesn’t need to be totally lock-step in their support of the establishment and the conventional wisdom. The establishment candidate in the 2008 Democratic primaries was Hillary Clinton. There were significant worries expressed that nominating Obama would be a mistake because he was inexperienced. It isn’t fair to exclude those who supported Obama in the primaries as not being “the Democratic base” because they didn’t go with the establishment candidate, and then start calling the same people “the Democratic base” once again after Obama won the general election. That’s just silly. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/9 "2013-01-24T05:03:57Z")
Well, but Obama had establishment figures on his side too: Tom Daschle, Harry Reid, Claire McCaskill. I’m talking more about when a party throws away an easily winnable election because their most fervid primary voters go too far to one side or another. In recent times it has mostly been in the GOP: they threw away gimmes in Indiana and Missouri this cycle, and last time in Nevada and Delaware. ---
**Author:** ![SmartAlecCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SmartAlecCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAlecCat)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/10 "2013-01-24T14:39:41Z")
The base are those that not only will vote for you, but that like/identify with you so much they will give you money, call their friends and tell them to vote for you, put out signs, etc. If you “lose your base”, the fear isn’t so much that they won’t vote for you (though some may stay home), but that they won’t give you money, campaign for you, etc. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/11 "2013-01-24T15:58:06Z")
**SmartAlecCat** , this is how I see the base as well. But I think the key question here is: is it metaphysically possible for a party to be constantly losing, or on the verge of losing, its base? That is: if there is a group of diehard ideologues that constantly grouse about how watered down the party’s positions are, or how the majority of elected officials from that party are “INOs” (RINOs or DINOs, as the case may be), are they really the base? I would submit that _the base has to be proud of, and enthusiastic about, their party and the majority of its elected officials most of the time._ They can get restive on occasion if something or someone comes along and upsets the apple cart; but if they are constantly bitter and scornful, they just don’t qualify to be considered “the base” as I see it. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/12 "2013-01-24T17:50:25Z")
But the defections do happen. It happened in 2000. Not to all the Democratic base, but a sizable number of people who had been reliable Democratic voters voter for Nader instead because they thought Bill Clinton was a Republican in donkey’s clothes. Now, the specific question you’re asking is how often, precisely, does a voter have to support his/her party to be considered the base? That is an unanswerable question to the same extent that if you have a bucket full of rocks, how many pebbles can you remove before the bucket is no longer full? ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/13 "2013-01-24T23:43:01Z")
Sure, ultimately this is a semantic dispute. But that doesn’t mean one can’t have an opinion and advocate for it! My vehement opinion is that anyone who voted for Nader is excommunicated from being considered part of the base as I define it, unless they later saw the light and were extremely repentant. I guess that’s the fundamental definitional question: whether “the base” of a party refers to the group of people who are ideologically furthest away from the \*other \*party in a two party system, but therefore regularly get frustrated with their own party and often support it only as a “lesser of two evils” proposition; or whether–as I strongly believe–it refers to a group that, more than anything, is enthusiastic and proud to be identified with their own party’s “brand”. By this definition, I am a signal member of the Democratic Party’s base, as are most African Americans from what I can tell. My fellow white progressives/liberals, though, quite often do not qualify as “base” by my definition. In fact, as much as I get frustrated with them for making the perfect the enemy of the good, they sneer at me for being a cheerleader for what they see as tepid, timid policies (or worse). ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2013, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/14 "2013-01-25T08:44:58Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Sure, ultimately this is a semantic dispute. But that doesn’t mean one can’t have an opinion and advocate for it! My vehement opinion is that anyone who voted for Nader is excommunicated from being considered part of the base as I define it, unless they later saw the light and were extremely repentant. > > I guess that’s the fundamental definitional question: whether “the base” of a party refers to the group of people who are ideologically furthest away from the \*other \*party in a two party system, but therefore regularly get frustrated with their own party and often support it only as a “lesser of two evils” proposition; or whether–as I strongly believe–it refers to a group that, more than anything, is enthusiastic and proud to be identified with their own party’s “brand”. By this definition, I am a signal member of the Democratic Party’s base, as are most African Americans from what I can tell. My fellow white progressives/liberals, though, quite often do not qualify as “base” by my definition. In fact, as much as I get frustrated with them for making the perfect the enemy of the good, they sneer at me for being a cheerleader for what they see as tepid, timid policies (or worse). So dos the democratic base believe in supporting gay marriage? ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2013, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-partys-base/648122/15 "2013-01-25T14:13:32Z")
I would say the Democratic base has just recently come around to supporting gay marriage. When Obama ran in the 2008 primaries he supported civil unions but not full marriage. His recent evolution to support of full marriage reflects the change of thinking among the base, I believe.