That's a cliche. It ignores the reality of how the Democrats came to exist, and how they have evolved over the decades to be very different from what they used to be.
People gloss over the fundamentals when they characterize people as unchanging groups or classes. We are all the same species of humans, so somehow some of us become "Democrats" or "Liberals", and if you got rid of all of them, over time, the same sort of people and ideas would just reemerge again.
I used to ponder how we get rid of all the liberals, and then I realized, if you did get rid of all the liberals, more would pop into existence from the remaining population.
I think Liberalism is primarily a side effect or consequence of prosperity. If you've looked at the issue, you notice all the wealthy places tend to be liberal.
Where in our society does this liberalism stuff come from? Well Massachusetts, New York, and California are all liberal. What makes them that way?
You say the Dems are the party of violence, but didn't the Republicans launch the invasion of them back in 1861? Didn't their armies burn cities and kill people?
Seems like violence is just a human thing, and both sides will use it when they think it is the best answer.
I think a lot of people know that a willingness to go to violence has a tendency to keep people behaving. Notice how we didn't have any wars when Trump was in office before? People were worried he would go Defcon 3 if they pissed him off.
Kept the peace.
The problem isn’t “liberalism.” A liberal can have a civil conversation. A person could take a liberal position on some issues and conservative on others.
The problem is leftism. Leftists are not liberals. They gang up and harass you if you don’t agree with them. They riot, loot, and kill if they do not get their way. They stomp you if they feel offended or throw you into prison for offending them.
The Democratic Party is not liberal. It is leftist. It’s all about force.
I’m not saying every Democrat is violent. I’m saying the party has a long history of violence… and force.
In Sumner’s time, congressmen threw insults at each other. Sometimes, Sumner was the target, yet he never physically attacked anyone in retaliation.
What Brooks did was not self-defense. It is different from a president striking back against a foreign enemy who attacks us.