Not all Democrats are bad

Interesting take here on the numerous otherwise-decent people who still vote for the Democrat Party. I have long contended than many, perhaps even most, people who continue to support the Democrat Party, now more correctly called the Democrat Socialist Party, do so out of habit and not paying sufficient attention to today’s world.

Or paying attention to the wrong news sources.

Dave Morrison, a Los Angeles-area musician, house painter and YouTube whiz, was a Democrat until the 2012 presidential election. I was a Democrat till four years earlier, so Dave is a little slower than I am. He was a Democrat for, I suspect, the same reasons I was, family tradition and ignorance of the Democrat Party’s true history.

He makes a case here that many Democrats, especially middle-aged and older folks, are victims of a sort of Stockholm Syndrome. He makes his case politely and sensibly.

He is a forgiving soul.

(This post is dedicated to all my ex-wives, my daughter and 99 percent of my former coworkers on the Houston Chronicle.)

11 thoughts on “Not all Democrats are bad

  1. This guy makes a lot of sense. I believe most of us are well described by his logic. Like you I grew up in a southern state where voting Democrat (think FDR) was expected and pretty much followed by the vast majority. The Eisenhower election changed that, at least in Texas. I remember well some of the political arguments among family and other locals. The tone of those arguments was nothing like the bashing one hears today. In fact, such behavior would not have been tolerated.

    If there is hope for us to survive as a nation it is likely in seeking a return to some of those attitudes we used to hold. We can disagree without being enemies.


    1. Ricardo: Dinesh D’Souza stated it clearly a while back. The problem is that before the Democrat Party morphed into the Democrat Socialist Party, the two parties agreed on the goals, but they disagreed on the way to attain those goals. Now they don’t even agree on the goals.


  2. That guy sounds like me. Although I’m not American, my allegiances would have been with the Democrats up until Obama. Didn’t like the Bushes, Cheney and that bunch. Only backed Obama (lukewarm) because it would get the first black president out of the way, but I realize now that was a mistake. Dave makes some good points about people being afraid of being cancelled, doxxed or fired, and that’s what’s driving their behaviour. Candace Owens makes similar points about the black community. I believe things are changing, and more people are waking up. The pendulum can only swing so far.


    1. Brent: Here’s what I always say when anyone says Obama was the first black president. He wasn’t. He was the first biracial president, no more black than white. The first black president has yet to take office. Of course, Weepy Barry will tell you he’s black. He “identifies” as black, which he’s long done because, for a long time now in America, it’s advantageous to be black. It opens doors. It can even open the door to the Oval Office. That advantage is why you laughably encounter whites nowadays on occasion trying to pass as black, never the other way around. Used to be the other way around when being white was advantageous, but now it’s the reverse.

      Yes, people are waking up but until they adopt the thug mindset which “the mob” possesses, numbers are of scant importance. Thuggery is what matters, and scaring and threatening people. The left is good at that. Conservatives are not.


  3. I think that the number one misperception out there is the belief that Democrats are liberal. In fact, they are anything but. Over the past year, we’ve seen Democrat representatives in Congress call for the elimination of First Amendment rights. Yesterday we saw the dismissal of the City Manager of Brooklyn, MN, for calling for due process. We continually see Democrat-associated media figures calling for the deplatforming of folks they disagree with, such as their “public enemy number one,” Tucker Carlson. (Who if they actually listened to, would discover that he’s hardly a raging conservative.) On campus, they are full of intolerance for any views besides their own.

    And now, the Democrats are also the party of multi-billionaire tech moguls, and the home of corporations who want to dictate voting laws.

    It’s really quite sad. While the Republicans are FAR from perfect, they are a whole lot better on fundamental rights than the corporatist Democrats.


    Kim G
    Boston, MA
    Where I’m appalled at the court-packing bill co-sponsored by one of my feckless senators.


    1. Kim: As I point out at almost every opportunity, today’s Democrat Socialists (aka the Democrat Party) hijacked the word liberal, something they are definitely not. Not progressive either. Leftists excel at the misuse of language.

      One bright spot in the news is that Pelosi said she will not move the court-packing bill forward now, but she did not rule it out for the future.


      1. Yes, I saw Pelosi’s comment, but I trust it about as far as I could throw her: very little. That said, many folks have reasonably argued that Biden’s “court-packing commission” is a way to satisfy those wanting a packed court without actually changing anything. And that seems reasonable. But it also seems that expecting reasonability from today’s Democrat party is not itself, reasonable.


        1. Kim: Bill O’Reilly, and he is well-informed, says there is no way it can happen. Strictly against the Constitution. Hope he’s right.

          He also says the Democrat Party wants a one-party dictatorship. I believe that too.


          1. Well, the one-party dictatorship part is totally true. We already have it here in Massachusetts, and it’s almost that way in California too.

            But court packing is legally possible, though apparently a filibuster could stop it. That said, there may be some other, sneaky way to do it. In any case, it’s extraordinarily worrisome, even if the odds are long.


Comments are closed.