Replies

It is critical to remember that the Democrat Party thrives on a bad economy - - what they want more than anything else is an economic recession in which people lose their jobs, their homes, and their savings.

As difficult as it is to believe, what you say is so true.

I have pondered many times as to not only why this is true, but HOW it can become a politically tenable position. I think I have the answer.

The Democratic constituencey is composed of public sector employees, teachers, welfare and other recipients of tax-transfer payments, journalists, and union bosses. In short, these are people for whom PROSPERITY IS SOMETHING WHICH HAPPENS TO EVERYBODY ELSE.

Unlike the contractor, or the car salesman, the construction worker, or anyone who depends on commercial activity for their livlihood and their economic status, these people must vote in those who would vote for, what they receive monetarily. Upturns in economic activity is a tide which raises all boats...except theirs. ENVY is the operative emotion here. This huge and growing constituency has to sit back in stasis economically while EVERYONE ELSE benefits disproportionately, in their eyes, from GDP growth.

This is why policies like tax cuts which "go to" our nation's employers and investors are seen as anathema to their interests, as they are indeed mired in a zero-sum predicament, IMHO.

The Democratic constituencey is composed of public sector employees, teachers, welfare and other recipients of tax-transfer payments, journalists, and union bosses.

All true but don't omit government workers from the list. I have a friend who works for the federal government. He is a staunch DimRat because, he says, he gets better pay increases under Rat administrations. Quite a deep thinker and patriot. LOL.

Great post.
All this psycho-analyzing of the Democrats makes my head hurt.
They're like some weird alien lifeform.

The Democratic constituencey is composed of public sector employees, teachers, welfare and other recipients of tax-transfer payments, journalists, and union bosses. In short, these are people for whom PROSPERITY IS SOMETHING WHICH HAPPENS TO EVERYBODY ELSE.

That undoubtedly is part of it. I have a friend who works for the state, and he's a Democrat too. But knowing that his mother died with a photo of John F. Kennedy on the mantle of her house, I don't think that was the whole story. My own theory is a bit different. I hold that, as my tagline puts it, "The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR."
And that if you care about nothing but PR, you simply mouth what makes a "great story" without regard to any other consideration than how it will look in the newspaper. The innate arrogance, negativity, and superficiality of mass-market journalism does the rest.

Why Broadcast Journalism is Unnecessary and Illegitimate