Skip to main content

Liberal purists are hurting the Democratic Party

I don't officially affiliate myself with either political party. If I were to label myself, I'd say I'm a liberal/progressive Independent. However, given the limited options on election day, I tend to vote Democratic. In saying all of that, I think liberal purists are hurting the Democratic Party.

As a liberal who tends to vote Democrat, I think fellow progressives need to step back for a moment, take a deep breath, and come to the realization that we don't want to follow a similar path as Republicans have over the past couple of decades. Over the past 20+ years, with the help of Fox News, talk radio, and now the Internet, the Republican Party has been increasingly trending right. Progressive Republicans have gone the way of the dodo bird; moderate Republicans have been placed on the endangered species list; and the GOP has seemingly reached the point where, if an aspiring Congressional member of the party doesn't keep in lockstep with the party's leaders on each and every issue, they and conservative media outlets will tell their followers not to vote for this person on election day. Now, 20 years later, the GOP has become about as diverse in thought as The Bachelor is diverse in body types. This has closed the party off to demographics such as: Women, Latinos, blacks, Muslims, LGBTs, teachers, scientists, fact-checkers, etc. If the Democratic Party wants to remain relevant for the long haul, they can't follow that same route and I'm fearful they're on the verge of doing so.

We all have our beliefs, our ideal vision of America, but we have to remain realistic and do everything in our power to help bring this nation closer to our ideal vision of it. While that will happen when we hold steadfast in certain areas, it will only happen if we compromise in others. We can't expect to continually make progress if we exclude people from our party for holding a single different viewpoint than us. What we should be doing is the direct opposite. Instead of telling a person he or she isn't a Democrat because they're "pro-life," for example, what we should be doing is telling them, "While I disagree with your opinion on reproductive rights, we have a big tent over here at the Democratic Party, welcome you with open arms, and hope we can come to some form of compromise with regard to our difference in opinion on the matter, to where we can decrease the number of abortions in this country, yet maintain a woman's right to choose what to do with her body when she becomes impregnated."

While I admit to being fairly liberal, I know a majority of people in this country identify as moderate, and it will do absolutely no good for myself or other liberals like me to continually exclude moderates from the Democratic Party due to a single difference of opinion. If we do that, the party isn't going to last very long...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"