The New York Times doesn’t mind telling you that it’s worried. Deeply worried. The primary cause of its worry, of course, is That Man in the White House, who is a threat to “our democracy” (by which leftists mean “our hegemony”) and to everything that is good. Coming in a close second on the Paper of Record’s anxiety list, however, is the sorry state of the Democrat Party, which, instead of mounting a robust response to Trump, is sliding ever farther into the insanity of its own making, and rendering itself irrelevant and, indeed, ridiculous to all but the radical blue-haired, pierced fringe. On Saturday, the Times Editorial Board published a remarkable opinion piece pleading with the Dems to get their act together before it’s too late, and Orange Man Bad transforms the American political landscape forever.
It seems improbable in the extreme that the Dems will heed the pleas of their leading propaganda arm and drop their obsession with men who think they’re women, open borders, inflationary fiscal policies and galloping authoritarianism, but there are historical precedents. The Democrat Party, whatever else it was, used to be adaptable to circumstances. In 1968, it went down to defeat with presidential candidate Hubert Humphrey, who supported the war in Vietnam. As the war grew increasingly unpopular, the Democrats moved farther to the left (which is always easy for them) and nominated the virulently antiwar, far-left Sen. George McGovern in 1972. When McGovern’s candidacy went down in flames, losing 49 states, the party moved back toward the center by going with southern Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976.
All that, however, was a long, long time ago. Now the party of Andrew Jackson and FDR is in the grip of hardline leftist ideologues who seem to care more about adherence to the far-left line than about electoral viability. All the party’s old ability to adapt has been lost; to change course now would apparently make one a class traitor, or a racist, or a fascist, or whatever the left’s favorite term for those it fears and hates is these days.
The Democrats of 2025, in fact, are more rigid and doctrinaire than Mao’s China ever was at the height of the Cultural Revolution. Party apparatchiks believe their nonsense with religious fervor, and are quick to condemn anyone who deviates from the party line as heretics. It’s unlikely, given its long decades of service, that the New York Times will end up being anathematized for its Saturday editorial, but there is no doubt that at least some Democrat party top dogs are enraged over it.
That is because the Times laments that “in the aftermath of this comprehensive defeat” in the 2024 elections, “many party leaders have decided that they do not need to make significant changes to their policies or their message.” Instead, the Times explains, they’re making excuses. The Dems were “the unlucky victims of postpandemic inflation.” The party is “more popular than it seems,” but just needs to “communicate better, particularly on social media and podcasts.” Most Americans “still prefer Democrats,” but “voter apathy allowed Mr. Trump to win.” If all this sounds like whistling in the dark, that’s only because that’s exactly what it is.
What’s amazing is that the Times appears to be aware of this, saying that these excuses are “a form of denial that will make it harder for the Democratic Party to win future elections.” And this is such a shame, weeps the Grey Lady, because the country “needs a healthy Democratic Party, given Mr. Trump’s takeover of the Republican Party and his draconian behavior.” The Democrat Party, says the Times, “is in a difficult position. It must compete with a Republican Party that shows an alarming hostility to American democracy.” Yeah, that again. And so we see that even as it scolds the Democrats for not being able to adapt and part with some of their cherished (and insane) ideas, the Times suffers from exactly the same malady.
For the truth is that the Republican Party is no threat to “American democracy” (spoiler alert: it’s really a republic) at all. The real threat to “American democracy” came from a Democrat, Old Joe Biden, when his regime conspired with the social media giants to silence dissidents, and when his handlers attempted to establish a “Disinformation Governance Board,” and when it transformed the Justice Department into an instrument of partisan politics and attempted to frame Biden’s principal opponent on various bogus charges. The Times wasn’t worried about “American democracy” then. It was cheering on Old Joe and his henchmen every step of the way.
Related: DNC Meeting Doubles Down on the Crazy
Now, however, the Times Editorial Board urges Democrat top dogs “to continue speaking out against Mr. Trump’s authoritarian behavior — his bullying of military leaders, judges, law firms, universities and the media; his disdain for Congress; his attempts to chill speech through deportation; his tolerance for incompetent cabinet secretaries who endanger American troops.” All that, of course, is wildly distorted, tendentious, and/or outright false, but that’s the New York Times for you.
Despite all that, it is remarkable that even the Times is worried about the Dems. Maybe it’s time for leading leftists to stage an intervention, and try to bring the party of nose-pierced Marxist internationalists back to reality. Given the strength of the delusions, fantasies, perversions and insanity that prevail among leftists, however, the Democrats may be beyond saving.
