Serious/Not Sarcastic: What happened to the democratic party and when??

submitted by ChillyChili from (self.politics)

Democrats werent always extremist liberals. It represented something much different back then than of today.

Some of my ancestors were highly conservative, but democrats. Democrat of today is very different and would be unrecognizable to democrats of the past. What changed? Why? Was it an intentional shift to destroy democracy? When did they try to insert liberalism into the democratic party that meant something much different? It was not liberal vs conservative which is what they try to align the parties with today.

all 21 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Globalism happened. Democrat politicians, starting with Bill Clinton, sold us out in return for kickbacks from China. They've all gotten very rich while successfully convincing their voters that we're racist if we care more about feeding our own kids than the kids of illegal immigrants.

[–]magnora7 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Neoliberals took over the Democrat party.

Just like Neoconservatives took over the Republican party in the 80s and 90s.

Now we have two parties run by authoritarian corporatists.

[–]ChillyChili[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I dont think it started wirh clinton. Like, he was a pile of shit and maybe I was too young to see everything but for a party to go from including conservatives to supporting super-super-duper-extremist liberalism seems like a big shift.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It goes all the way back to Nixon and his trip to China — perhaps even further — but that's the latest.

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Clinton's famous phrase was "it's the economy, stupid". He actually tried to get the democrats back on a sensible good economy and law and order stance.

This stuff likely started back with FDR, the bored rich using the government to patronise the poor under the guise of social justice, especially their personal favourite victim groups. The Kennedys definitely had a big dose of this illness as well.

Then when GWB got in the left just went super crazy, just like it did over Trump. So it's not really something the democrats did, rather their over reaction to Bush/Trump winning and their reliance on rich donors allowed the crazies, who had always been around, to steal their party out from under them.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Actually, it started with Nixon. He was the guy who went to China for 8 days and signed the Shanghai Communique. Jimmy Carter came after him, and he was even worse — he was the guy who recognized the PRC, and nearly handed them the ROC on a silver platter.

Keep in mind this all happened after JFK was assassinated by a Communist who'd defected to the USSR.

[–]MobiusRacetrack 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most favored trading partner. -The party under Clinton became more concerned with power than people.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Globalism demands coordination. They had to replace partisan judges protecting terrorist ghosts with partisan judges protecting antifa and BLM. Everything is different, some of them are even openly black now.

[–][deleted]  (7 children)

[removed]

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

    It was SCOTUS, not Obama. He just pretended like it was him to make his base happy. He actually ran against gay marriage the first time, and conveniently changed his opinion right when the Supreme Court passed their legislation.

    But what Obama did do was bail out the banks and create Obamacare (which failed hard). It's less about marriages for less than 1% of the population, and more about the real issues that affect a majority of Americans.

    This could just be a troll (it feels a bit satirical, but maybe that's just me), but I said what I said.

    [–][deleted]  (5 children)

    [removed]

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

      I ain't a farmer, but I'm pretty sure if you put a bad apple in a basket full of good apples, that the good apples don't suddenly all become bad.

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

      They do tho

      https://theuijunkie.com/apple-spoils-the-bunch/

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

      It seems less like it spoils them, and more like it makes them age faster. This means that theoretically you could put a bad apple in a basket of unripe apples in order to make them ripe — and the article says farmers use the chemical bad apples produce to make bananas ripe.

      It says nothing about the speed, though, which is something I want to know. Does it happen in a few hours, a few days, weeks, what?

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      Yeah I guess you're right that it just causes a more rapid aging of the produce around it.

      Idk about the speed. It would be a fun experiment to play around with.

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

      It probably wouldn't smell that fun, though.

      [–]Zapped 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      It has been a long process. I think it started back to the 1930's and only the "Red Scare" after World War 2 slowed it down for a couple of decades. In my part of the country, people revered FDR for the Great New Deal because it provided "relief" from the Great Depression. It is amazing how people will vote down party lines because of the past and not the present or future. I remember the early 1980's when many Christian Conservatives left Democrat Party. I noticed a big change towards "Progressivism" in the late 1980's and early 1990's. It seems like the differences were more about taxation and social programs before then. Also, Democrats were anti-war back then, as well.

      [–]ChillyChili[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      Interesting. The part about the relief from the The Depression relief also makes sense as to why some continued to be loyal to the party. Thanks for explaining.

      [–]ExecuteHomophobes 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      It was always a fucking hate group.

      [–]BeautifuLusers 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      It appears to me to have started with Obama administration.

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      https://theweek.com/articles/528827/rise-neocons

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB104121045871745553

      It began with the leftist exile of the 'NeoCons' from the DNC....their welcoming by the Republicans is also where the weakening of conservatives began.