Why are so many Trump supporters attracted to the JFKA?

[Tom Graves]

The real danger is if the Democrats ever gain control of the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives which they probably will. When that happens, they will end the filibuster, pack the Supreme Court, and grant statehood to DC and Puerto Rico, making it very difficult for the GOP to take back the Senate. They will then be able to ram through their radical agenda. It almost happened in 2020 but we were lucky to have a couple sane Democrats in Joe Manchin and Kristen Sinema to prevent that from happening. The only one we have now is John Fetterman and I don't think he will be enough to stop all this if the Democrats get 51 senators.

When did you start fighting "the Democrats' radical agenda"?

1980?

Regardless, why do you think Vladimir Putin installed Trump as our "President"?

[John Corbett]

When did you start fighting "the Democrats' radical agenda"?

1980?

Until 2020, the radical agenda wasn't in the Democrat mainstream. That all changed when AOC shocked the Democrat establishment in 2018 by beating 10 term congressman Joe Crowley in the Democrat primary. Suddenly all the once sensible Democrats got scared and embraced the far left because most congressman and senators realized they were more likely to lose in the primaries than in the general elections. They lacked the guts to oppose policies that would have seemed unthinkable 10 years earlier. They embraced the goofiest policies such as open borders, cashless bail, and men in women's sports. Only fools would think those were good ideas but that's your modern Democrat Party.

[Jarrett Smith]

The real danger is if the Democrats ever gain control of the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives which they probably will. When that happens, they will end the filibuster, pack the Supreme Court, and grant statehood to DC and Puerto Rico, making it very difficult for the GOP to take back the Senate. They will then be able to ram through their radical agenda. It almost happened in 2020 but we were lucky to have a couple sane Democrats in Joe Manchin and Kristen Sinema to prevent that from happening. The only one we have now is John Fetterman and I don't think he will be enough to stop all this if the Democrats get 51 senators.

I highly doubt Americans will want a return to the Biden/Obama disaster. This whole Iran mess goes back to Jimmy Carter a good decent man, but weak weak weak like most liberals. The bulk of proud Americans aka conservatives know Iran can't have nukes, and any sane person want's the border to remain closed.

[Tom Graves]

Until 2020, the radical agenda wasn't in the Democrat mainstream. That all changed when AOC shocked the Democrat establishment in 2018 by beating 10 term congressman Joe Crowley in the Democrat primary. Suddenly all the once sensible Democrats got scared and embraced the far left because most congressman and senators realized they were more likely to lose in the primaries than in the general elections. They lacked the guts to oppose policies that would have seemed unthinkable 10 years earlier. They embraced the goofiest policies such as open borders, cashless bail, and men in women's sports. Only fools would think those were good ideas but that's your modern Democrat Party.

ME: Is this statement correct?

"Until 2020, the radical agenda wasn't in the Democrat mainstream. That all changed when AOC shocked the Democrat establishment in 2018 by beating 10 term congressman Joe Crowley in the Democrat primary. Suddenly all the once sensible Democrats got scared and embraced the far left because most congressman and senators realized they were more likely to lose in the primaries than in the general elections. They lacked the guts to oppose policies that would have seemed unthinkable 10 years earlier. They embraced the goofiest policies such as open borders, cashless bail, and men in women's sports."

GROK: Partially correct on the timeline and AOC's win but overstated as a sudden "shock" that radicalized the entire mainstream party— the leftward shift on these issues was more gradual, driven by multiple factors including voter trends, activism, and reactions to Trump-era politics.

nytimes.com

AOC's 2018 Primary Win

This part is accurate. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), a 28-year-old Democratic Socialist and former Bernie Sanders organizer, defeated 10-term incumbent Rep. Joe Crowley (a powerful House Democratic Caucus chair) in New York's 14th district primary on June 26, 2018, by about 57%-43%. It was a major upset that symbolized progressive energy against the establishment.

nytimes.com

It did energize progressives and highlighted primary threats from the left. Some moderate Democrats expressed concern about moving too far left post-2018, while others saw it as a signal to adapt.

cnn.com

Broader "Radical Agenda" and Mainstream Shift

The claim that the "radical agenda" was absent from the Democratic mainstream until ~2018-2020 is an oversimplification. The party had been shifting left on cultural and economic issues for years:

Pre-2016/2018 trends: Democratic voters and platforms moved progressively on issues like immigration, criminal justice, and identity. Pew data showed Democrats viewing immigrants more positively over decades (e.g., from ~32% in 1994 seeing them as strengthening the country to much higher later). Bernie Sanders' 2016 run already pulled the party left on economics and inequality.

npr.org

The 2016 platform and Obama-era policies were more centrist on some fronts (e.g., border enforcement rhetoric from earlier Democrats like Schumer or Clinton), but activism on criminal justice and social issues grew steadily.

trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov

AOC's win amplified visibility (e.g., via the Squad and Justice Democrats), and the 2020 primaries/campaign saw more progressive rhetoric. However, establishment figures like Biden won the nomination, and many "radical" policies didn't become universal party law. The House flipped in 2018 with many moderates in swing districts.

nytimes.com

Specific Policies

Open borders: Democrats have long supported legal immigration, asylum, and pathways to citizenship, but "open borders" is a rhetorical charge—not official policy. Pre-2018, leaders like Schumer criticized illegal immigration. Post-2016/Trump, the party unified more around humanitarian framing and opposed strict enforcement, with further shifts under Biden. This was evolutionary, accelerated by polarization, not solely AOC.

npr.org

Cashless bail / criminal justice reform: Bail reform (reducing cash bail for low-level offenses) predates 2018. Efforts date to the 1960s-80s, with modern pushes in the 2010s over racial disparities (e.g., Kalief Browder case). New York passed major reform in 2019 (effective 2020); similar in other blue areas. 2020 George Floyd protests and "defund the police" (mostly activist-driven, not universal Democratic policy) intensified it, but many Democrats later walked back amid crime concerns.

nytimes.com

Men in women's sports (transgender athletes): This became a flashpoint later. Significant Democratic support for inclusion aligned with gender identity grew in the mid-late 2010s with broader LGBTQ+ advocacy. Pre-2018, it was niche; it gained traction post-2018/2020. Many Democrats (and earlier polls) showed internal division or opposition to blanket policies, with recent post-2024 election pushback from some moderates.

npr.org

Primary vs. General Election Fear

There's truth here: Safe blue districts face more primary pressure from energized progressives (low-turnout primaries favor activists). This dynamic exists on the right too (e.g., Tea Party, Trump). Post-2018, more progressive challengers ran, but establishment candidates still dominated many races. The party's 2020 platform and Biden's win reflected a balance, not full capture.

theatlantic.com

Bottom line: AOC's win was a notable moment that boosted the left's profile and contributed to caution among incumbents. However, Democratic shifts on these issues were underway due to changing voter bases (more college-educated, urban, diverse), cultural trends, and reactions to national events—not a single 2018 "shock" turning "sensible" Democrats into radicals overnight. The party remains factional, with moderates often prevailing in national/general election contexts. Claims of sudden embrace of "goofiest" policies reflect partisan framing more than a clean pre/post-2018 break.

8 web pages

[John Corbett]

I highly doubt Americans will want a return to the Biden/Obama disaster. This whole Iran mess goes back to Jimmy Carter a good decent man, but weak weak weak like most liberals. The bulk of proud Americans aka conservatives know Iran can't have nukes, and any sane person want's the border to remain closed.

If you don't have borders, you don't have a country. I wish I was as confident as you that the Democrats will not return to power. What we are seeing now is the result of decades of indoctrination by our education system from the lowest levels to higher education. I don't know when this started because I didn't see it when I attended a public high school back in the late 1960s. Millennials and Gen-Zers are being taught that socialism is just fine and a disgusting number of them believe political violence and quashing free speech is perfectly acceptable. The Democrat Party has encouraged this kind of thinking that wouldn't have been politically viable even 20 years ago.

The electorate is fickle and only once since WWII has either major party controlled the White House for three consecutive terms (Reagan/Bush). The party in power gets blamed for whatever goes wrong which is why power swings back and forth between the two major parties. To make matters worse, if the Democrats get control of both houses of Congress, they can admit new states without presidential approval. The Constitution gives Congress sole power to admit news states. It won't happen but I would like to see the GOP take preemptive action by making Guam and American Samoa new states. Since those are military bases, they would be reliably Republican Senate seats. That would offset plans by the Democrats to make Puerto Rico and DC states. They would need to dump the filibuster to do that, but they might as well since the Democrats will do that as soon as they get control of the Senate. That would also allow them to get the SAFE act through and prevent the Democrats from shutting down parts of the government they don't like. 

[John Corbett]

ME: Is this statement correct?

"Until 2020, the radical agenda wasn't in the Democrat mainstream. That all changed when AOC shocked the Democrat establishment in 2018 by beating 10 term congressman Joe Crowley in the Democrat primary. Suddenly all the once sensible Democrats got scared and embraced the far left because most congressman and senators realized they were more likely to lose in the primaries than in the general elections. They lacked the guts to oppose policies that would have seemed unthinkable 10 years earlier. They embraced the goofiest policies such as open borders, cashless bail, and men in women's sports."

GROK: Partially correct on the timeline and AOC's win but overstated as a sudden "shock" that radicalized the entire mainstream party— the leftward shift on these issues was more gradual, driven by multiple factors including voter trends, activism, and reactions to Trump-era politics.{/quote]

BS. Once moderate Democrats caved to the far left for fear they would get primaried. Fetterman is the only moderate Democrat in the Senate and he will probably be primaried in 2028. He would be wise to switch parties now. Arlen Specter switched from Republican to Democrat to try to save Senate seat in Pennsylvania. It didn't work.

nytimes.com

AOC's 2018 Primary Win

This part is accurate. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), a 28-year-old Democratic Socialist and former Bernie Sanders organizer, defeated 10-term incumbent Rep. Joe Crowley (a powerful House Democratic Caucus chair) in New York's 14th district primary on June 26, 2018, by about 57%-43%. It was a major upset that symbolized progressive energy against the establishment.

nytimes.com

It did energize progressives and highlighted primary threats from the left. Some moderate Democrats expressed concern about moving too far left post-2018, while others saw it as a signal to adapt.

cnn.com

Broader "Radical Agenda" and Mainstream Shift

The claim that the "radical agenda" was absent from the Democratic mainstream until ~2018-2020 is an oversimplification. The party had been shifting left on cultural and economic issues for years:

Pre-2016/2018 trends: Democratic voters and platforms moved progressively on issues like immigration, criminal justice, and identity. Pew data showed Democrats viewing immigrants more positively over decades (e.g., from ~32% in 1994 seeing them as strengthening the country to much higher later). Bernie Sanders' 2016 run already pulled the party left on economics and inequality.

npr.org

The 2016 platform and Obama-era policies were more centrist on some fronts (e.g., border enforcement rhetoric from earlier Democrats like Schumer or Clinton), but activism on criminal justice and social issues grew steadily.

trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov

AOC's win amplified visibility (e.g., via the Squad and Justice Democrats), and the 2020 primaries/campaign saw more progressive rhetoric. However, establishment figures like Biden won the nomination, and many "radical" policies didn't become universal party law. The House flipped in 2018 with many moderates in swing districts.

nytimes.com

Specific Policies

Open borders: Democrats have long supported legal immigration, asylum, and pathways to citizenship, but "open borders" is a rhetorical charge—not official policy. Pre-2018, leaders like Schumer criticized illegal immigration. Post-2016/Trump, the party unified more around humanitarian framing and opposed strict enforcement, with further shifts under Biden. This was evolutionary, accelerated by polarization, not solely AOC.

npr.org

Cashless bail / criminal justice reform: Bail reform (reducing cash bail for low-level offenses) predates 2018. Efforts date to the 1960s-80s, with modern pushes in the 2010s over racial disparities (e.g., Kalief Browder case). New York passed major reform in 2019 (effective 2020); similar in other blue areas. 2020 George Floyd protests and "defund the police" (mostly activist-driven, not universal Democratic policy) intensified it, but many Democrats later walked back amid crime concerns.

nytimes.com

Men in women's sports (transgender athletes): This became a flashpoint later. Significant Democratic support for inclusion aligned with gender identity grew in the mid-late 2010s with broader LGBTQ+ advocacy. Pre-2018, it was niche; it gained traction post-2018/2020. Many Democrats (and earlier polls) showed internal division or opposition to blanket policies, with recent post-2024 election pushback from some moderates.

npr.org

Primary vs. General Election Fear

There's truth here: Safe blue districts face more primary pressure from energized progressives (low-turnout primaries favor activists). This dynamic exists on the right too (e.g., Tea Party, Trump). Post-2018, more progressive challengers ran, but establishment candidates still dominated many races. The party's 2020 platform and Biden's win reflected a balance, not full capture.

theatlantic.com

Bottom line: AOC's win was a notable moment that boosted the left's profile and contributed to caution among incumbents. However, Democratic shifts on these issues were underway due to changing voter bases (more college-educated, urban, diverse), cultural trends, and reactions to national events—not a single 2018 "shock" turning "sensible" Democrats into radicals overnight. The party remains factional, with moderates often prevailing in national/general election contexts. Claims of sudden embrace of "goofiest" policies reflect partisan framing more than a clean pre/post-2018 break.

8 web pages

The bottom line is that the Democrats have always had a radical left element but the radicals were sent to the back of the bus. Once AOC beat Crowley, the radicals took over the driver's seat and the moderates in the party meekly submitted for fear of getting primaried themselves.