Last week, I received emails from two friends, each supporting different Maine U.S. Senate candidates.

They reveal that this year’s campaign is really about the Republicans. The Democrats may offer an alternative, but for many, simply holding back tea party conservatism is what matters.

In one email, Cynthia Dill, the Democratic candidate, was praised for her “stand on the issues that you care about.” Her stand was not described, but presumably reflects traditional party policy. 

The message also never mentioned Charlie Summers, her Republican opponent. Instead, it took on Angus King, the independent front-runner, reflecting Democratic worries that King is draining votes away from Dill.

In the other email, a Democrat supported King and, by inference, opposed Dill. The sender believes that if Democrats don’t support King, the anti-Summers forces will be so divided that the Republican will be elected.

He recalled that Gov. Paul LePage had been elected in 2010 because his opposition was divided between an independent and a Democrat.

Both messages were essentially about beating Summers. One thought the Democratic candidate could do it, but the other saw her as a spoiler.

Will the election strengthen the hold of the tea party-driven Republicans on the levers of government or reverse it? Democrats and independents are being asked to be pragmatic and keep their focus on dumping the GOP.

Rep. Paul Ryan, the GOP vice presidential candidate, has been the chief strategist of his party’s budget policy. He represents the conservative push to make deep cuts in what the federal government does.

If preserving essential government services requires a tax increase on the wealthy, Ryan should make voters understand it won’t happen under Republican control.

National polling lends support to the pragmatic approach that opposes this policy. A majority worries about the drastic reduction in government programs that must result from Republican plans to cut taxes and reduce the size of government.  

And voters want action and bipartisanship, not ideological wars.

In Maine, that helps King. Nationally, without independents in the field, that may help Democrats. Voters blame Republicans more than Democrats for partisan gridlock.

Surveys had been showing that President Barack Obama and Democratic congressional candidates were on the way to holding the White House and Senate and perhaps even regaining a majority in the House of Representatives.

Then came the first presidential debate. Romney was seen as the winner, perhaps because he was more self-confident than Obama.

But that was probably not the real reason. Before a huge national audience, he seemed to abandon many of the hard right policies he had adopted this year and stressed his supposedly bipartisan achievements as governor of Massachusetts.

Romney understood. Voters were turning their backs on tea party policies and looking for candidates who were less ideological. So he presented himself as a moderate, not only in the debate but also on the campaign trail in the following days.

In fact, on many issues Romney’s positions sounded remarkably like Obama’s.

One leading national political commentator summed up the debate by observing that Romney “managed to shift his positions toward the center without getting too much immediate pushback for it.”

Obama let Romney get away with candy coating his conservatism so the Republican could make himself look like a moderate. Romney accomplished his tactic by simply denying his support of policies that are central to his campaign.

For example, he said that he had not proposed an almost $5 trillion tax cut over the next 10 years, but he has. He seems to believe that a tax cut is not a tax cut if its cost will be covered by new tax revenues from hoped-for future growth in the economy. Obama never called him on that doubtful proposition.

In Maine, Summers may create the same illusion. He says he supports Ryans’ draconian budget reduction target, but then backs away from supporting certain program cuts that Ryan proposed and without which the budget cannot really be deeply reduced.

If the Democrats let Romney and the Republicans use the national debates to draw attention away from their own conservative policies, the GOP can reduce the number of voters who worry about electing Romney and the party’s congressional candidates.

After a weak debate performance by Obama, the Democrats are trying to cut through GOP campaign camouflage by relying on a barrage of television ads. So far, that is not working.

Obama needs to be pragmatic in the debates and make clear that the election is a referendum on tea party conservatism.

The Republicans can win by obscuring that fact. The Democrats can only win by making it their campaign theme.

— Gordon L. Weil is an author, publisher, consultant, and former official of international organizations and the U.S. and Maine governments.