An old classmate of mine posted on Facebook: “I am hereby terminating my membership in the Republican Party. This is not the party I grew up with.”
As he explained it, Donald Drumpf winning his state’s primary was the reason.
The post received many comments. Most were positive; some echoed his lament regarding the loss of the party of their past.
I was confused.
The Republican Party has been on a bee-line to Donald Drumpf since the 1990s. When Bill Clinton was elected to the presidency, Republicans threw hissy fits unlike any I had seen in my lifetime. Newt shut down the government (and subsequently tanked his career in the process), party members (and supporters) sensationalized Monica Lewinsky (ignoring the threat known as Osama Bin Laden in the process), and the rhetoric and attitude created led to near-violence in Republican protests in Florida during the 2000 recount.
Since then, anger has been the driving force of the Republican Party. Fox News stoked the flames, giving a home to the “Us vs Them” mentality. There would be locked arm adherence to the party, and no capitulation to Democratic desires. They lost the presidency in 1992 and damn well weren’t going to let that happen again.
The “fiscally conservative” Republican party started two wars and wiped out the economy under G.W. Bush. The 2008 primaries forced John McCain to throw his entire career under the bus in order to appeal to the fringes, and created Sarah Palin in the process. Palin became a megaphone of ignorance, and reason and logic were put aside by believers, grown adults who allowed direct questions to be labeled “gotcha questions” in order to justify the incompetence of the nominee. Republicans dutifully toed the party line that year, and did so again in 2012, ignoring four years of economic improvement and deciding someone who wore magic underpants was a good idea.
Republicans watched as members of their party announced women couldn’t get pregnant if raped (Todd Akin), and that some women “rape easy” (Roger Rivard)… Yet somehow Donald Drumpf is a candidate who takes things too far?
I don’t get it.
Maybe his comments about Mexicans pushed things over the line: “Twelve million illegal immigrants later, we are now living in a nation that is beset by people who are suicidal maniacs and want to kill countless innocent men, women, and children around the world.”
Oops, wait. That was Senator Fred Thompson in 2007.
Donald Drumpf didn’t usurp the Republican Party, he embodies it. The idea he is causing Republicans to leave the party baffles me, and does so for two reasons. One: Donald Drumpf is the culmination of years of Fox News and Teabagger nonsense, so they should embrace him as their own Frankenstein. Two: he’s the best Republican candidate running.
As I write, the three remaining candidates are Donald Drumpf, Ted Cruz, and John Kasich. What makes Drumpf better than the other two? Drumpf is a blowhard, but he’s not a believer.
Kasich has a horrendous record regarding women’s rights, and Ted Cruz means every insane word he says. Cruz has as many word-for-word outrageous quotes as Drumpf, but for reasons unknown isn’t held accountable for them. Patrol Muslim neighborhoods? We need more senators like Jesse Helms? That scares me. I would much rather be represented by someone who shouts things Republicans have whispered for years than by someone who attacks women’s rights quietly (Kasich) or truly believes that people interested in LGBT rights are waging “jihad” (his word) on states like Indiana and Arkansas for not supporting their attempts at discriminatory laws (Cruz).
Yes, Drumpf advocates violence at his rallies. As said, he’s finally being open about what the party stands for, and I appreciate honesty. Many African-Americans say they’d rather know someone is openly racist than someone who lies about their bigotry. I feel the same way about my political candidates.
Drumpf treats women as sex objects. He objectifies them. Kasich actively denies them access to health care, and Cruz has promised to. Which is worse?
(Yes, Drumpf has made awful statements about women’s health care, but he’s so all over the place regarding the issue it’s hard to believe he’s nothing but bluster. Again: blowhard, not believer.)
I don’t believe Drumpf would attempt half the things he says, and I know for a fact he can’t deliver on a majority of the promises he makes.
Maybe happening, but in a way, I would laugh at all the poor white trash helped by the ACA yet who vote Republican anyway.
(I’m looking at you, Kentucky.)
Maybe the Republican Party is the proverbial frog in a pot of water being brought to boil: they didn’t notice (or actively ignored) what was happening until it was “too late.” Well, Donald Drumpf is impossible to ignore.
As said, the people who gravitate to Cruz or Kasich scare me more than the dimwitted lemmings interested in Drumpf. I won’t vote for him, but I won’t be unhappy if he somehow cons his way into the White House.
After all, plants crave electrolytes.