Why should liberals be considered a problem just because they're white? Does a white person have the right to believe what they want, or not? Are they not allowed to have an opinion because we're white?
Not only are Democrats stuck on cultural issues, Trump knows it and uses it. Instead of a GOP establishment “moderate” stance, he forces the issue by taking blunt, traditional, common sense, majority stands: There are only two sexes. No men in women’s sports. No transing kids. Democrats are forced to disagree, and the issues are too hot to avoid. Most see through the transparent dodges of “It’s a distraction” or “Leave it up to localities.” Campaigning will require yes or no answers. The GOP would be fools to not make culture a midterm issue.
The reality is the left wing progressives have captured control of the Democrats, and viciously punish any dissenters. At the same time they can’t be unaware that their policies are on the nose with much of the electorate. Think males in female spaces, open borders, soft on crime to name a few. Instead of realising we sure fucked up last time. It’s time to change or moderate these policies, if we want to get into government. They are doubling down on them. Hoping Trump will make such a mess of things that voters will come back. Maybe a few, but a big percentage are going to vote for an Indepedent that looks like a chance of getting in ( Republicans take note this can happen to you if your doing a shit job) or the may just “ Quiet Quit” and go for a picnic or fishing on polling day.
I've really enjoyed your other work and have mentioned it in arguments many times, but I think they are probably going to get away with it the way things are going. With a two-party system you just have to be less awful than the other guy.
I just think some affluent liberals of all races occasionally are in cultural bubbles on some very specific issues like trans and welfare- anything seen as "unkind" is regarded as a moral failing rather than confronting fiscal, biological, or even just political realities. I do however believe the prestige media such as the New York Times and CBS are moving more to openly discuss these topics. The real challenge now will be Gen Z voters' influence on their parents and fostering notions that radical, far-left policies on fiscal issues and the middle east are normal
You and I may like or dislike their political stance (which definitely has allowed for some outlandish stuff, especially during the 2020 BLM moment), but serious people in all decision-making institutions (business, government, academia, etc) aside from the MAGA executive branch at the present time see them as authoritative and elite (WSJ is the only conservative media outlet in the category of prestige, or "mainstream" media- I don't know why "mainstream" as a word has taken on a negative character; who are defining themselves actively against a "mainstream"- conspiratorial cranks or edgy teenagers?). This is not the case for Breitbart/Tucker/Fox/social media or on the left opinion startups and lowbrow stuff like HuffPo etc
" I don't know why "mainstream" as a word has taken on a negative character;"
I'll tell you. It is their lazy, intellectually dishonest conformity even when they publish falsehoods. For instance, they reported that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. Reporters from the NY Times and the Washington Post received a Pulitzer Prize for a story we now know now to have been false. Many "mainstream" news channels reported that Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russian hoax, then it turned out to be quite real. Their conformity makes them "mainstream" and their history of unanimity in false reporting makes "mainstream media" pejorative.
Yes, because the MSM became a liberal near-monopoly long before 2017. An example of their Obama swoon: “Obama seemed the political equivalent of a rainbow — a sudden preternatural event inspiring awe and ecstasy....He transcends the racial divide so effortlessly that it seems reasonable to expect that he can bridge all the other divisions — and answer all the impossible questions — plaguing American public life.” -- Time’s Joe Klein, October 23, 2006 cover story
They are certainly mainstream. The rest is subjective and debatable hence the rise of the podcast and all these armchair "experts." There's a reason they don't have the reader/viewership they once had. Too many partisan lies and the inability to not spin the news.
Among those inside major institutions that require a high IQ and/or an advanced degree, they still are granted the greatest credence and have the most sterling reputation; this is not a judgement on whether they deserve it (imo they do; if you think the leading podcasts - Rogan, Tucker, Candice, Piker, Kelly, et al have a higher epistemological grasp on overall reality you really are out of touch with it; even if I agree that the Times et al have covered some major issues (COVID, trans, crime) with an eye towards soothing the anxieties of the most sensitive and politically correct readers; they have as I noted previously pivoted away from this to a large extent since Trump won again. The Times's most egregious example of regular and ongoing bias is its outrageous description of New York schools as "segregated" as though Bull Connor is in charge just because the authorities aren't (yet, who knows with the current mayor) overtly demolishing selective ie merit-based and quality schooling. Also, their cultural coverage is too accepting of commercial and politically correct schlock. This is really cringe-worthy and infuriating, but compare it to the outright hoaxes featured on most podcasts not created by these prestige outlets and Fox News which acts like Trump's cabinet is not a joke (a professional wrestling CEO as Education Secretary is something out of Idiocracy, and people like Hegseth, Kash Patel, and RFK are obviously unqualified) and the much-maligned legacy outlets look like paragons of impartiality and accuracy.
> “ if you think the leading podcasts - Rogan, Tucker, Candice, Piker, Kelly, et al have a higher epistemological grasp on overall reality you really are out of touch with it”
A quick question to determine your grasp of overall reality:
Compare this one issue of mainstream media political correctness to literally dozens of issues on the fringe new media on most major topics and it's clear that one side at least exists in a realm of broad respect for evidence and empirical judgement on most topics (there is also a double standard here; there would be outrage and cries of "you can't go after someone's faith" if Democrats laughed daily about how a huge section of Republicans won't admit evolution is real; but it's just taken for granted that an entirely false epistemology is just allowed to persist as an untouchable perspective mocked and sneered at despite being essentially magical thinking and just as inaccurate as the next conspiracy theory. Much of podcast world is just a younger, more secular generation adopting their own version of magical thinking not rooted in Evangelical Christianity et al)
Now it's the GOP who are in need of 1,001 Sister Souljah moments, having stayed totally supine as their leader stages an authoritarian institutional takeover, sends armed paramilitaries into the cities of political opponents, engages in historically unprecedented corruption, destroys the remainder of the political infrastructure of the West that the Greatest Generation fought a world war to create, and holds the country hostage to quixotic narcissistic distractions--from almost starting an inter-NATO war over Greenland to starting an actual war with Iran for no coherent reason.
Meanwhile, the election of Talarico over Crockett shows that the Dems are learning their lesson, and embracing greater regionalism over woke theatrics. The coalition is way bigger than white liberals, Ruy--check your numbers. Latinos are back in their camp in overwhelming numbers, repulsed by what they've seen under a MAGA-led government, along with African Americans, too. Beside new faces like Talarico, there's a huge stock of fresh talent: Warnock, Ossoff, Beshear, Polis, Shapiro...the list goes on. MAGA has Trump, Trump clones, and a VP who will be stuck with the stink of a colossal Iran War debacle.
It's anyone's game still and nothing is guaranteed, but I think you're stuck in 2024 and things have already changed significantly. Not that any of it matters vis a vis the US as a great power, though. There is no repairing the institutional and geopolitical damage that has been done by Trump since January 2025. In twenty years, when China is ascendant over us, it will have become clear that Trump 2.0 marked the death of the American century--a death entirely and tragically self-inflicted.
What you say is all true, Minsky. Trump and his criminal cabal are indeed destroying the country.
And the Democrats still have their heads up their asses. Unless they wake up, they will continue to lose voters.
Here's one longtime lefty who has voted for Democrats for 50 years and is going to sit out the next election entirely because I'm so disgusted with the Dems' insistence on shitting all over women, just in a different way from the way the Repubs do it.
I agree with you. The dems will probably do better in '26 and' 28, but if they changed their unpopular social positions they could be way more successful. We should be trying to take 60 seats in the senate not 48 or whatever is actually feasible right now.
That is indeed what people say in lieu of any proper argument. We learn it in third grade—“nu-uh, you’re just a doo-doo head!” It spares you the agony of admitting you don’t have one—or are too lazy to think the issue through.
> “In twenty years, when China is ascendant over us
If we want to stay ahead of China we need free markets and monogamy. The left has taken both away from us. Asians in both the US and in their native countries are highly monogamous and hard-working. Those go together, along with the high Asian IQs. Promiscuity is a decadent luxury for a declining society.
Let's do an Ike and make the problem bigger. It's not just white liberals, it's the whole concept of the administrative state that was going to solve the problem of the "spoils system."
Back then, in 1880, US government spending was about 6 percent of GDP and federal debt was 20 percent of GDP. After 150 years of administrative government by the educated class total spending is now at 44 percent and debt is at 139 percent GDP.
What is the educated, evolved, white liberal solution to this problem?
It's funny how white Liberals are often Liberal on behalf of non-white constituencies. Sometimes it comes across to some non-white constituencies as patronizing, insulting, or even racist. That's true when the white Liberals assume all voters of a particular racial or ethnic group vote the same way, and it's especially true when white Liberals accuse voters of being traitors to their race or ethnicity when they vote differently than the white Liberals think they should
Have you ever seen a British film from the 1960s called GUNS AT BATASI? It was based on a satirical play about the end of the British colonial period, but the film doesn't play as a comedy. One of the best moments comes when a British female Member of Parliament, visiting an African colony about to assume independence, gets taken hostage by one of her former students from when she was a lecturer at Oxford. She's flabbergasted that he's leading a coup to take power as a dictator rather than helping establish democracy. He gives her a lecture of his own about how mind-numbingly boring and insulting he found her lectures and how he resents her assumption that she knows what's best for his country. It's satisfying to watch.
You quote Damon Linker: "When voters become convinced that a specific politician or party has bad (or just sufficiently different) moral judgment, they lose trust in that politician or party. And then other, more superficial policy commitments don’t matter…"
You do understand, don't you, that this applies to primary voters as well? Given that the primaries determine who moves on to the general election, any Democratic candidate with "bad" (or just sufficiently different) moral judgment as assessed by the Liberal/Progressive/Woke voters who dominate the party will be rejected in the primaries, regardless of the non-cultural policies he or she runs on. And if that candidate dares suggest working with the Trump Administration or Republicans in any capacity on any issue, that will drive a stake through the heart of his or her candidacy.
True. Look at what they are doing to my Senator Fetterman because he doesn’t vote as a performance for the “progressives.” He votes with the Dems when they need his vote, but is attacked when he occasionally votes with the Republicans when his vote won’t make a difference to the outcome of the
Sen. Fetterman is sadly aware of how his occasional divergence from the Progressive voting line makes him persona non grata in his own party. Of course, it's not just that he doesn't vote with his party on those occasions, it's that he refuses to vote against Trump always and in every instance.
It's kinda crazy that Fetterman is liked and respected by almost everyone (Republican, Independent, Democrat), except Liberals. He's out there trying to tell his party what's wrong, but they aren't listening.
If I lived in PA, Fetterman is the only Democrat who would make me consider crossing party lines. It's common sense positions that are principled and not just party. I think most voters want that.
The antizionist eliminationist hate movement party - their 2.5 years of libeling Israel during the DEFENSIVE war against the Hamas “Palestinians”, who crossed a border to commit a barbaric rape/massacre ritual, are now paying dividends. Jews face savage beatings, synagogues are shot at and vandalized - Dems never said a fucking word while their DSA/Islamic arm dehumanized and delegitimized Israel and demanded that the Jews jump in the river.
Fuck the Democrats - 75% of Jews voted for them for 100 years and they couldn’t even condemn the campus pograms or the ahistorical lies being taught on American campuses and at K-12.
And then there’s the embrace of Platner, the Nazi death head tattoo guy. Yet another DSA communist Bolshevik,
I will never vote for another Dem not named Fetterman or Ritchie Torres.
I changed my voter registration to NP about a year ago. I’m far from the only one, but I have no idea how many. It took me over a year to let go of the “lifelong Democrat” part of my identity, even though there was never a question that Judaism was integral to who I am & what I believe, in a way no political party could replace - even when I had a bad case of “TDS”
I can only assume that other Jewish Dems are going through a similar process. I don’t know how many, though.
But, it is true that we are a small minority and probably won’t be able to affect election outcomes or party platforms unless we vote as a bloc and get very loud and organized.
Thank you for that! I had TDS as well and was a Never Trumper from 2016 until 2021.
I assume Ruth is not your real name and you picked it because of your faith? It's got one of my favorite lines in all of scripture: "Entreat me not to leave you, Or to turn back from following after you; For wherever you go, I will go; And wherever you lodge, I will lodge; Your people shall be my people, And your God, my God."
Why should liberals be considered a problem just because they're white? Does a white person have the right to believe what they want, or not? Are they not allowed to have an opinion because we're white?
is this stop 1 in white libs being purged from their own party and replaced with the 3rd world hordes?
Not only are Democrats stuck on cultural issues, Trump knows it and uses it. Instead of a GOP establishment “moderate” stance, he forces the issue by taking blunt, traditional, common sense, majority stands: There are only two sexes. No men in women’s sports. No transing kids. Democrats are forced to disagree, and the issues are too hot to avoid. Most see through the transparent dodges of “It’s a distraction” or “Leave it up to localities.” Campaigning will require yes or no answers. The GOP would be fools to not make culture a midterm issue.
The reality is the left wing progressives have captured control of the Democrats, and viciously punish any dissenters. At the same time they can’t be unaware that their policies are on the nose with much of the electorate. Think males in female spaces, open borders, soft on crime to name a few. Instead of realising we sure fucked up last time. It’s time to change or moderate these policies, if we want to get into government. They are doubling down on them. Hoping Trump will make such a mess of things that voters will come back. Maybe a few, but a big percentage are going to vote for an Indepedent that looks like a chance of getting in ( Republicans take note this can happen to you if your doing a shit job) or the may just “ Quiet Quit” and go for a picnic or fishing on polling day.
Based on my own read of public opinion data, spot on.
Excellent piece! It explains why I am no longer a Democrat: the party is too liberal for me.
I've really enjoyed your other work and have mentioned it in arguments many times, but I think they are probably going to get away with it the way things are going. With a two-party system you just have to be less awful than the other guy.
Dont know how I got you on my feed.
I just think some affluent liberals of all races occasionally are in cultural bubbles on some very specific issues like trans and welfare- anything seen as "unkind" is regarded as a moral failing rather than confronting fiscal, biological, or even just political realities. I do however believe the prestige media such as the New York Times and CBS are moving more to openly discuss these topics. The real challenge now will be Gen Z voters' influence on their parents and fostering notions that radical, far-left policies on fiscal issues and the middle east are normal
I live in Portland and this is Portland and Oregon policies in a nut shell. And they’ve destroyed this city.
“Prestige media - NYT & CBS”? Sorry, you just lost all credibility, just as they did long ago.
You and I may like or dislike their political stance (which definitely has allowed for some outlandish stuff, especially during the 2020 BLM moment), but serious people in all decision-making institutions (business, government, academia, etc) aside from the MAGA executive branch at the present time see them as authoritative and elite (WSJ is the only conservative media outlet in the category of prestige, or "mainstream" media- I don't know why "mainstream" as a word has taken on a negative character; who are defining themselves actively against a "mainstream"- conspiratorial cranks or edgy teenagers?). This is not the case for Breitbart/Tucker/Fox/social media or on the left opinion startups and lowbrow stuff like HuffPo etc
" I don't know why "mainstream" as a word has taken on a negative character;"
I'll tell you. It is their lazy, intellectually dishonest conformity even when they publish falsehoods. For instance, they reported that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. Reporters from the NY Times and the Washington Post received a Pulitzer Prize for a story we now know now to have been false. Many "mainstream" news channels reported that Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russian hoax, then it turned out to be quite real. Their conformity makes them "mainstream" and their history of unanimity in false reporting makes "mainstream media" pejorative.
The derisive tone of the phrase began long before 2017
Yes, because the MSM became a liberal near-monopoly long before 2017. An example of their Obama swoon: “Obama seemed the political equivalent of a rainbow — a sudden preternatural event inspiring awe and ecstasy....He transcends the racial divide so effortlessly that it seems reasonable to expect that he can bridge all the other divisions — and answer all the impossible questions — plaguing American public life.” -- Time’s Joe Klein, October 23, 2006 cover story
They are certainly mainstream. The rest is subjective and debatable hence the rise of the podcast and all these armchair "experts." There's a reason they don't have the reader/viewership they once had. Too many partisan lies and the inability to not spin the news.
Among those inside major institutions that require a high IQ and/or an advanced degree, they still are granted the greatest credence and have the most sterling reputation; this is not a judgement on whether they deserve it (imo they do; if you think the leading podcasts - Rogan, Tucker, Candice, Piker, Kelly, et al have a higher epistemological grasp on overall reality you really are out of touch with it; even if I agree that the Times et al have covered some major issues (COVID, trans, crime) with an eye towards soothing the anxieties of the most sensitive and politically correct readers; they have as I noted previously pivoted away from this to a large extent since Trump won again. The Times's most egregious example of regular and ongoing bias is its outrageous description of New York schools as "segregated" as though Bull Connor is in charge just because the authorities aren't (yet, who knows with the current mayor) overtly demolishing selective ie merit-based and quality schooling. Also, their cultural coverage is too accepting of commercial and politically correct schlock. This is really cringe-worthy and infuriating, but compare it to the outright hoaxes featured on most podcasts not created by these prestige outlets and Fox News which acts like Trump's cabinet is not a joke (a professional wrestling CEO as Education Secretary is something out of Idiocracy, and people like Hegseth, Kash Patel, and RFK are obviously unqualified) and the much-maligned legacy outlets look like paragons of impartiality and accuracy.
> “ if you think the leading podcasts - Rogan, Tucker, Candice, Piker, Kelly, et al have a higher epistemological grasp on overall reality you really are out of touch with it”
A quick question to determine your grasp of overall reality:
Do some women have penises?
I can't help but notice that reader "9000" left a long, convoluted run-on sentence in reply yet never answered your question. So I'll do it for him:
"Do some women have penises?"
No.
Compare this one issue of mainstream media political correctness to literally dozens of issues on the fringe new media on most major topics and it's clear that one side at least exists in a realm of broad respect for evidence and empirical judgement on most topics (there is also a double standard here; there would be outrage and cries of "you can't go after someone's faith" if Democrats laughed daily about how a huge section of Republicans won't admit evolution is real; but it's just taken for granted that an entirely false epistemology is just allowed to persist as an untouchable perspective mocked and sneered at despite being essentially magical thinking and just as inaccurate as the next conspiracy theory. Much of podcast world is just a younger, more secular generation adopting their own version of magical thinking not rooted in Evangelical Christianity et al)
This article is very 2024--quite dated in 2026.
Now it's the GOP who are in need of 1,001 Sister Souljah moments, having stayed totally supine as their leader stages an authoritarian institutional takeover, sends armed paramilitaries into the cities of political opponents, engages in historically unprecedented corruption, destroys the remainder of the political infrastructure of the West that the Greatest Generation fought a world war to create, and holds the country hostage to quixotic narcissistic distractions--from almost starting an inter-NATO war over Greenland to starting an actual war with Iran for no coherent reason.
Meanwhile, the election of Talarico over Crockett shows that the Dems are learning their lesson, and embracing greater regionalism over woke theatrics. The coalition is way bigger than white liberals, Ruy--check your numbers. Latinos are back in their camp in overwhelming numbers, repulsed by what they've seen under a MAGA-led government, along with African Americans, too. Beside new faces like Talarico, there's a huge stock of fresh talent: Warnock, Ossoff, Beshear, Polis, Shapiro...the list goes on. MAGA has Trump, Trump clones, and a VP who will be stuck with the stink of a colossal Iran War debacle.
It's anyone's game still and nothing is guaranteed, but I think you're stuck in 2024 and things have already changed significantly. Not that any of it matters vis a vis the US as a great power, though. There is no repairing the institutional and geopolitical damage that has been done by Trump since January 2025. In twenty years, when China is ascendant over us, it will have become clear that Trump 2.0 marked the death of the American century--a death entirely and tragically self-inflicted.
What you say is all true, Minsky. Trump and his criminal cabal are indeed destroying the country.
And the Democrats still have their heads up their asses. Unless they wake up, they will continue to lose voters.
Here's one longtime lefty who has voted for Democrats for 50 years and is going to sit out the next election entirely because I'm so disgusted with the Dems' insistence on shitting all over women, just in a different way from the way the Repubs do it.
I agree with you. The dems will probably do better in '26 and' 28, but if they changed their unpopular social positions they could be way more successful. We should be trying to take 60 seats in the senate not 48 or whatever is actually feasible right now.
Get help. You sound insane.
That is indeed what people say in lieu of any proper argument. We learn it in third grade—“nu-uh, you’re just a doo-doo head!” It spares you the agony of admitting you don’t have one—or are too lazy to think the issue through.
As I said, get help.... you sound insane.
If you had an argument, I might be able to discuss it, you know. But clearly you don’t.
> “In twenty years, when China is ascendant over us
If we want to stay ahead of China we need free markets and monogamy. The left has taken both away from us. Asians in both the US and in their native countries are highly monogamous and hard-working. Those go together, along with the high Asian IQs. Promiscuity is a decadent luxury for a declining society.
I don’t see anyone stopping you from being monogamous.
The issue is whether or not we will slide into decadence and let China dominate the world.
I suspect leftists want exactly that, since China is communist and they want communism to win.
Let's do an Ike and make the problem bigger. It's not just white liberals, it's the whole concept of the administrative state that was going to solve the problem of the "spoils system."
Back then, in 1880, US government spending was about 6 percent of GDP and federal debt was 20 percent of GDP. After 150 years of administrative government by the educated class total spending is now at 44 percent and debt is at 139 percent GDP.
What is the educated, evolved, white liberal solution to this problem?
Debt and overspending is bipartisan. Both parties love spending money, one hates all taxes and the other is afraid to raise them, both are childish.
It's funny how white Liberals are often Liberal on behalf of non-white constituencies. Sometimes it comes across to some non-white constituencies as patronizing, insulting, or even racist. That's true when the white Liberals assume all voters of a particular racial or ethnic group vote the same way, and it's especially true when white Liberals accuse voters of being traitors to their race or ethnicity when they vote differently than the white Liberals think they should
When you assume the role of white savior, the recipient of your noblesse oblige needs to be properly grateful.
Have you ever seen a British film from the 1960s called GUNS AT BATASI? It was based on a satirical play about the end of the British colonial period, but the film doesn't play as a comedy. One of the best moments comes when a British female Member of Parliament, visiting an African colony about to assume independence, gets taken hostage by one of her former students from when she was a lecturer at Oxford. She's flabbergasted that he's leading a coup to take power as a dictator rather than helping establish democracy. He gives her a lecture of his own about how mind-numbingly boring and insulting he found her lectures and how he resents her assumption that she knows what's best for his country. It's satisfying to watch.
I'll look it up.
The specific clip is the last fifteen seconds of this, but watch all four minutes to get the context.
https://youtu.be/5jRBOZ4jOqY?si=Q4e_eDj6tgMmp5U4
You quote Damon Linker: "When voters become convinced that a specific politician or party has bad (or just sufficiently different) moral judgment, they lose trust in that politician or party. And then other, more superficial policy commitments don’t matter…"
You do understand, don't you, that this applies to primary voters as well? Given that the primaries determine who moves on to the general election, any Democratic candidate with "bad" (or just sufficiently different) moral judgment as assessed by the Liberal/Progressive/Woke voters who dominate the party will be rejected in the primaries, regardless of the non-cultural policies he or she runs on. And if that candidate dares suggest working with the Trump Administration or Republicans in any capacity on any issue, that will drive a stake through the heart of his or her candidacy.
True. Look at what they are doing to my Senator Fetterman because he doesn’t vote as a performance for the “progressives.” He votes with the Dems when they need his vote, but is attacked when he occasionally votes with the Republicans when his vote won’t make a difference to the outcome of the
bill or resolution.
Sen. Fetterman is sadly aware of how his occasional divergence from the Progressive voting line makes him persona non grata in his own party. Of course, it's not just that he doesn't vote with his party on those occasions, it's that he refuses to vote against Trump always and in every instance.
It's kinda crazy that Fetterman is liked and respected by almost everyone (Republican, Independent, Democrat), except Liberals. He's out there trying to tell his party what's wrong, but they aren't listening.
If I lived in PA, Fetterman is the only Democrat who would make me consider crossing party lines. It's common sense positions that are principled and not just party. I think most voters want that.
Amended: White Woke Women problem.
The antizionist eliminationist hate movement party - their 2.5 years of libeling Israel during the DEFENSIVE war against the Hamas “Palestinians”, who crossed a border to commit a barbaric rape/massacre ritual, are now paying dividends. Jews face savage beatings, synagogues are shot at and vandalized - Dems never said a fucking word while their DSA/Islamic arm dehumanized and delegitimized Israel and demanded that the Jews jump in the river.
Fuck the Democrats - 75% of Jews voted for them for 100 years and they couldn’t even condemn the campus pograms or the ahistorical lies being taught on American campuses and at K-12.
And then there’s the embrace of Platner, the Nazi death head tattoo guy. Yet another DSA communist Bolshevik,
I will never vote for another Dem not named Fetterman or Ritchie Torres.
The Dems are the Islamo-communist-Nazi Party.
I’m with you Ruth, but I doubt may Jews are switching parties or even holding their nose and splitting their tickets.
Thank you.
I changed my voter registration to NP about a year ago. I’m far from the only one, but I have no idea how many. It took me over a year to let go of the “lifelong Democrat” part of my identity, even though there was never a question that Judaism was integral to who I am & what I believe, in a way no political party could replace - even when I had a bad case of “TDS”
I can only assume that other Jewish Dems are going through a similar process. I don’t know how many, though.
But, it is true that we are a small minority and probably won’t be able to affect election outcomes or party platforms unless we vote as a bloc and get very loud and organized.
Thank you for that! I had TDS as well and was a Never Trumper from 2016 until 2021.
I assume Ruth is not your real name and you picked it because of your faith? It's got one of my favorite lines in all of scripture: "Entreat me not to leave you, Or to turn back from following after you; For wherever you go, I will go; And wherever you lodge, I will lodge; Your people shall be my people, And your God, my God."