Fear is the operative word here. The ultimate fear for a politician: the next election may be his/her last one–ever. It has gripped the Democratic Party and paralyzed them. The legislative activity of give and take has come to a halt and the vacuum is being filled by bizarre and fanciful ideas from what was always the fringe area of political life.
At the root is a Democrat fear that they may not regain power for a long time. By any means necessary, they have chosen to obstruct President Donald J. Trump’s ability to deliver on his signature campaign issue: a wall on our Southern border to stop illegal immigration from Mexico.
How Power Has Waxed and Waned for 90 Years
We begin with the election of Republican Herbert Hoover in 1928. A cyclical recession began soon after, climaxing with the stock market crash of 1929. Instead of keeping hands off, as Coolidge did in 1920, Hoover aggressively prepared to head off any inflation threat by restricting the money supply. Shortage of currency was so severe that some states printed script so that simple things like groceries could be purchased.
Understandably, voters opted for a change in 1932 with the election of Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt who led us into The Great Depression and World War II. It is interesting how political power has come and gone since that time.
| 1928 | 1932 | 1936 | 1940 | 1944 | 1948 | 1952 | 1956 | 1960 | 1964 |
| R | D | D | D | D | D | R | R | D | D |
| 1968 | 1972 | 1976 | 1980 | 1984 | 1988 | 1992 | 1996 | 2000 | 2004 |
| R | R | D | R | R | R | D | D | R | R |
| 2008 | 2012 | 2016 |
| D | D | R |
Democrats held power for twenty years after Hoover’s ineptitude and Republicans held the presidency for most of 20 years after the turbulent sixties. And now, we are experiencing the aftermath of eight Obama years which brought us falling economic expectations and cost the Democrats 1,042 federal and state legislative losses. Trump has brought a completely different approach to governance and the opposition is fumbling for a response.
New Blood?
What makes their job doubly difficult is a heavily biased media which promote extreme liberal positions not favored by a majority of the public since their Obama experience. As fresh faces compete for Democratic Party leadership, people like Senators Kamala Harris (California), Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota), and Cory Booker (New Jersey) bask in media adoration while people like centrist Congressman Conor Lamb (Pennsylvania) receive nary a mention.
The problem is that the liberal/socialist group sounds like more Obama.
The usual suspects like Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden don’t know which way to turn, radical left or back to the center, and so they focus their energies on obstructing the president from any success. In early campaign appearances, Warren has been echoing Trump’s populist positions but she has demonstrated her comfort zone most anyplace on the political spectrum. Both are simply biding their time until they can pick up a wind direction.
That President Donald Trump has had amazing success is manifest —domestic and in the foreign policy arena— leaving very few substantive issues on which to launch an attack. And so, Democrats are focusing all their energy on “The Wall.” That is the issue, ironically, drawing a bright line between our two major parties.
To Wall or Not To Wall
For solid Trump backers, it is seen as a critical issue impinging on national security. Opposition has nothing to do with the chump change requested to continue the project, although it is used as substitute for the real reason which Democrats dare not articulate.
By proposing electronic surveillance and manpower in lieu of a wall, Democrats are paving the way for relaxation of border restrictions by future administrations who may view illegal immigrant voting as essential to maintaining political power. Tearing down a wall might be seen as too obvious.
The impasse between Democrats and Republicans over the wall has lasted a month, keeping 25 percent of the government shut down to seemingly very little inconvenience outside of Washington. Are we learning that, with a little rejiggering of the budget, we could permanently get rid a quarter of our government?
