The leaders of the Democratic party are struggling with a dilemma: how can they avoid appearing too friendly or not friendly enough to Muslim immigrants? And will they appear unsympathetic to their LGBT block?
Of course, the LGBT block has nowhere to go outside the Democratic party. Its votes are taken for granted.
So the Democrats are spinning Orlando as a gun problem or as a homophobia problem, being careful to avoid mentioning Muslim immigrants, at all cost.
The very future of the Democratic party is at stake. The LGBT block is not a growing one. And the Hispanic block might betray the Democrats, if they act like the Italian immigrants of 1910. They will work hard, marry whites, and a generation from now there will be lots of Republican suburbs with residents that have Hispanic surnames, but don't otherwise seem too Hispanic.
Imagine what a Democratic leader feels when it/she/he sees the juicy promise of a Europe that is being invaded by Muslims? If only they could have a success that big in the USA! The trick is to incorporate the hordes of Muslim immigrants into the Democratic party.
The Stoopid party will try to make that easy for the Democrats. Because of the Republicans' doctrine of permanent war, Muslims can see the Republicans as the embodiment of Evil. The Democrats will continue to position themselves as the Lite version of the warmonger cult.
Out of hatred of Republicans, and because they need SNAP, Obamacare subsidies, and affirmative action programs, Muslim immigrants will have an orientation toward the Democrats.
There is just one problem: the LGBT block is already firmly ensconced in the Democratic party. So that kills the deal, right? Before saying so, remember that Franklin Roosevelt somehow made a home for the "Solid South" of white voters as well as civil rights activists and Soviet "fellow travelers." Talk about an incongruous combination! But it worked until Nixon's Silent Majority was formed.
Thus we are left with some Democrat's opportunity to become the new FDR by reconciling the wave of the future, Muslim immigrants, and the already locked-up LGBT block. If they can do that, we will have a one-party system in this country. And the Democrats won't have to worry about being double-crossed by Muslims melting into the pot.
________________________________
It has been a few years since I reread Machiavelli's "The Prince." Perhaps he would have thought that I didn't do too bad in this post, for an amateur.
So the Democrats are spinning Orlando as a gun problem or as a homophobia problem, being careful to avoid mentioning Muslim immigrants, at all cost.
The very future of the Democratic party is at stake. The LGBT block is not a growing one. And the Hispanic block might betray the Democrats, if they act like the Italian immigrants of 1910. They will work hard, marry whites, and a generation from now there will be lots of Republican suburbs with residents that have Hispanic surnames, but don't otherwise seem too Hispanic.
Imagine what a Democratic leader feels when it/she/he sees the juicy promise of a Europe that is being invaded by Muslims? If only they could have a success that big in the USA! The trick is to incorporate the hordes of Muslim immigrants into the Democratic party.
The Stoopid party will try to make that easy for the Democrats. Because of the Republicans' doctrine of permanent war, Muslims can see the Republicans as the embodiment of Evil. The Democrats will continue to position themselves as the Lite version of the warmonger cult.
Out of hatred of Republicans, and because they need SNAP, Obamacare subsidies, and affirmative action programs, Muslim immigrants will have an orientation toward the Democrats.
There is just one problem: the LGBT block is already firmly ensconced in the Democratic party. So that kills the deal, right? Before saying so, remember that Franklin Roosevelt somehow made a home for the "Solid South" of white voters as well as civil rights activists and Soviet "fellow travelers." Talk about an incongruous combination! But it worked until Nixon's Silent Majority was formed.
Thus we are left with some Democrat's opportunity to become the new FDR by reconciling the wave of the future, Muslim immigrants, and the already locked-up LGBT block. If they can do that, we will have a one-party system in this country. And the Democrats won't have to worry about being double-crossed by Muslims melting into the pot.
________________________________
It has been a few years since I reread Machiavelli's "The Prince." Perhaps he would have thought that I didn't do too bad in this post, for an amateur.
Comments
I think we have a one-party system now with a Democrat wing and a Republican wing. That is why both of those 'parties' hate The Donald so much, he is showing the hoi polloi that is the scam. Party politics in the US of A can be compared to pro-wrestling but unfavorably because the politicians are not as honest about the show they are putting on.
Chris
Muslims at about 1%, the LGBT add maybe another 1-2% so there is 3+% of the population that the Media fawns over. But it is nothing like the 13+% that are African-American/Black/Negro that have been in the Democrats pocket for 4-5 generations now.
I am also not so sure there will be a Democrat Party after a generation or two. As far as that goes I'm not so sure there will be a United States of America after a generation or two. It may not make a bit of difference what The Donald says or how he says it.
Chris