CHAPEL HILL — The big news in North Carolina insider politics these days is the resignation of Senator Tony Rand — and his pending replacement as Senate majority leader by Senator Martin Nesbitt, who has the recommendation of Marc Basnight, the top leader of the Senate.

This big news is something that Raleigh political insiders are having trouble understanding or satisfactorily explaining to each other.

They are asking one another: Why would Rand resign one of the most powerful positions in state government and trade it for a position on the state’s parole commission? The parole board might be a great place for a politician who needs a paying job. But it is not the ideal place for a top lawyer legislator who is used to having continuing influence on everything the state government does.

The insiders wonder how Asheville’s Martin Nesbitt, whose geographical and political homelands are as far away as you can get from those of Manteo’s Marc Basnight, would get Basnight’s endorsement for the majority leader’s position.

I am not an insider, and probably never was, but I am having the hardest time trying to figure out this chain of events.

Some observers say it’s simple: Basnight is simply co-opting a potential rival by bringing Nesbitt into the leadership circle, where he would be less likely to organize a coup that would replace Basnight.

Others say that Basnight had to choose among the senators who would be seeking the position, and that Nesbitt was the least objectionable possibility.

Then, there are a few who say with some confidence that Nesbitt had already organized a group of discontented senators who were ready to oust Rand from his Senate leadership positions — and that Rand’s and Basnight’s acts were simply a recognition of that reality.

But nobody who talks to me seems to know for sure.

Whatever the explanation, Nesbitt’s ascension into an important leadership position is a landmark occurrence.

To begin to see some of the potential differences, it might help to review one of the classic books about North Carolina politics, “Tar Heel Politics 2000” by state representative and UNC-G professor Paul Luebke.

Luebke, an unapologetic liberal, maintains that North Carolina politics is solidly conservative — divided between “traditionalists” and “modernizers.” Traditionalists are obvious conservatives. They are skeptical of most forms of government activism — particularly of government spending to promote economic activity or to improve the lot of the less fortunate.

Modernizers are conservatives, according to Luebke, even though they often support “progressive” government programs to promote industrial development and education. They are conservatives, Luebke says, because their “progressive” programs are almost always funded with regressive taxes — like the sales and gasoline taxes and they do not seriously address issues of “equity” and fair treatment for the poor and powerless — concerns that are consistent with a real liberal program.

Under Luebke’s definitions, Basnight and Rand are modernizers or progressive conservatives, while Nesbitt (and Luebke) are genuine liberals. Modernizers and liberals have worked together in the Democratic legislative caucuses. But it has not been easy.

Put your ear to the ground and you will hear the liberals condemning the modernizers as being so conservative that they are not real Democrats. And you will hear the modernizers saying that a liberal agenda and leadership would lead to election defeat and loss of power.

To make a partnership between a modernizer and a liberal work, some of these voices have to be quieted.

So, bottom line, will Marc Basnight and Martin Nesbitt form a lasting and workable leadership partnership?

Both are very, very smart and very adept at gaining and maintaining power alliances. If they find a way to work together it could be a powerful partnership.

But, as for me, right now, I would not bet my fortune on it.