Crybabies and sore losers: Democrats throwing temper tantrums on an epic scale

Democrats are always bending the rules that will eventually destroy them in order to gain political advantage with the objective of gaining and maintaining political power.  Whenever something doesn't go their way, like losing the presidential election and, now, a situation where they have absolutely zero say in the appointment of a new Supreme Court justice, their first response is to blame the system and begin advocating changes. 

If the Democrats had their way right now, here are all of the things they would do to ensure a permanent one-party state in the United States and negate the possibility of another political party implementing its vision for country:

  • abolish the Electoral College
  • add Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico as states so there will be four additional senators (guaranteed to be Democrats)
  • end the filibuster in the Senate
  • add additional justices to the Supreme Court and/or term-limit the justices from sitting on the Supreme Court for life to 18 years

Starting with Hillary Clinton's loss to Trump in 2016, they began a drumbeat of eliminating the Electoral College and instead using the popular vote as the means by which the president is elected every four years.  The campaign to end the popular vote continues to this day through an insidious effort to get states to change their laws so electors will have to throw their vote to the winner of the popular vote.  A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact began not long after the 2016 and is described as follows:

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is an agreement among a group of U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.  The compact is designed to ensure that the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide is elected president, and it would come into effect only when it would guarantee that outcome.  As of July 2020, it has been adopted by fifteen states and the District of Columbia, although it is suspended in Colorado.

With the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the temper tantrum by the Democrats has reached a fever pitch.  Whereas some were quietly promoting two ideas after Trump's election — that the filibuster be eliminated in the Senate and packing the Supreme Court with additional justices — both are now loudly being resurrected.  Most recently, the idea of term-limiting the time justices can sit on the Supreme Court has been suggested by the Democrats.

What is lost in all of their nonsense of changing time-honored rules, laws, and tradition is their failure to win political victories on the basis of their ideas.  They continue to try to manipulate the system to their advantage, but their desperation as a failing party gets more extreme by the day.

What started over a hundred years ago with the relativism of Woodrow Wilson's "Living Constitution," a euphemism that is used to this day, is just a deceitful way of making excuses for changing things the Democrats and the left don't like to ones they do.  Carried to its logical conclusion, the Constitution would be destroyed by the erosion over time of all its laws and rules for the structure of governance.  The chaos in the streets of the country in many ways is just a reflection of the slow-motion breakdown of the regular order of governance in Washington, D.C. because of moving away from original constitutional principles that began with Wilson, who is considered the father of modern Progressivism.

The logic of liberalism means that rules and tradition can be changed at any time based on current whim without consideration for the past or the future in order to satisfy the instant political gratification of today.  The foundational principles for governance were meant to be timeless — that is, transcending time, regardless of any historical moment.

There is a book that openly describes how and why the left should destroy everything that's come before in order to satisfy its goals: It's Time to Fight Dirty: How Democrats Can Build a Lasting Majority in American Politics:

The American electoral system is clearly falling apart—as evidenced by the 2016 presidential election[.] ... With equal amounts of playful irreverence and persuasive reasoning, Faris describes how the Constitution's deep democratic flaws constantly put progressives at a disadvantage, and lays out strategies for "fighting dirty" though obstructionism and procedural warfare: establishing statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico; breaking California into several states; creating a larger House of Representatives; passing a new voting rights act; and expanding the Supreme Court.

And The New Yorker recently ran a screed that was nothing less than a polite cover for the left's new mantra of "Burn It All Down" called "The Case of Ending the Supreme Court As We Know It":

The events of this tumultuous and tragic year, from the ravages of the coronavirus pandemic to the fresh uprisings against racist police violence, have compelled a national reckoning like no other, opening new public, mainstream conversations about how we might remake this country more equitably.

Conservatism is called conservatism for a reason. It wants to conserve what is best about the past and history that has shown to work well while discarding what may be wrong or bad in current law.  Liberalism always wants to discard virtually everything, including what has traditionally worked very well.  It's an ideology of perpetual revolution and discontent that can never sit still, destroying everything in its wake.  Like a spoiled child, whenever the left doesn't get what it wants, it throws a major temper tantrum and begins crying out for changing the system because it's unfair to leftists in its current form.  This is also what happens when adults whose ideas have become bankrupt and become political losers have nothing left to do.

Democrats are always bending the rules that will eventually destroy them in order to gain political advantage with the objective of gaining and maintaining political power.  Whenever something doesn't go their way, like losing the presidential election and, now, a situation where they have absolutely zero say in the appointment of a new Supreme Court justice, their first response is to blame the system and begin advocating changes. 

If the Democrats had their way right now, here are all of the things they would do to ensure a permanent one-party state in the United States and negate the possibility of another political party implementing its vision for country:

  • abolish the Electoral College
  • add Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico as states so there will be four additional senators (guaranteed to be Democrats)
  • end the filibuster in the Senate
  • add additional justices to the Supreme Court and/or term-limit the justices from sitting on the Supreme Court for life to 18 years

Starting with Hillary Clinton's loss to Trump in 2016, they began a drumbeat of eliminating the Electoral College and instead using the popular vote as the means by which the president is elected every four years.  The campaign to end the popular vote continues to this day through an insidious effort to get states to change their laws so electors will have to throw their vote to the winner of the popular vote.  A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact began not long after the 2016 and is described as follows:

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is an agreement among a group of U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.  The compact is designed to ensure that the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide is elected president, and it would come into effect only when it would guarantee that outcome.  As of July 2020, it has been adopted by fifteen states and the District of Columbia, although it is suspended in Colorado.

With the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the temper tantrum by the Democrats has reached a fever pitch.  Whereas some were quietly promoting two ideas after Trump's election — that the filibuster be eliminated in the Senate and packing the Supreme Court with additional justices — both are now loudly being resurrected.  Most recently, the idea of term-limiting the time justices can sit on the Supreme Court has been suggested by the Democrats.

What is lost in all of their nonsense of changing time-honored rules, laws, and tradition is their failure to win political victories on the basis of their ideas.  They continue to try to manipulate the system to their advantage, but their desperation as a failing party gets more extreme by the day.

What started over a hundred years ago with the relativism of Woodrow Wilson's "Living Constitution," a euphemism that is used to this day, is just a deceitful way of making excuses for changing things the Democrats and the left don't like to ones they do.  Carried to its logical conclusion, the Constitution would be destroyed by the erosion over time of all its laws and rules for the structure of governance.  The chaos in the streets of the country in many ways is just a reflection of the slow-motion breakdown of the regular order of governance in Washington, D.C. because of moving away from original constitutional principles that began with Wilson, who is considered the father of modern Progressivism.

The logic of liberalism means that rules and tradition can be changed at any time based on current whim without consideration for the past or the future in order to satisfy the instant political gratification of today.  The foundational principles for governance were meant to be timeless — that is, transcending time, regardless of any historical moment.

There is a book that openly describes how and why the left should destroy everything that's come before in order to satisfy its goals: It's Time to Fight Dirty: How Democrats Can Build a Lasting Majority in American Politics:

The American electoral system is clearly falling apart—as evidenced by the 2016 presidential election[.] ... With equal amounts of playful irreverence and persuasive reasoning, Faris describes how the Constitution's deep democratic flaws constantly put progressives at a disadvantage, and lays out strategies for "fighting dirty" though obstructionism and procedural warfare: establishing statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico; breaking California into several states; creating a larger House of Representatives; passing a new voting rights act; and expanding the Supreme Court.

And The New Yorker recently ran a screed that was nothing less than a polite cover for the left's new mantra of "Burn It All Down" called "The Case of Ending the Supreme Court As We Know It":

The events of this tumultuous and tragic year, from the ravages of the coronavirus pandemic to the fresh uprisings against racist police violence, have compelled a national reckoning like no other, opening new public, mainstream conversations about how we might remake this country more equitably.

Conservatism is called conservatism for a reason. It wants to conserve what is best about the past and history that has shown to work well while discarding what may be wrong or bad in current law.  Liberalism always wants to discard virtually everything, including what has traditionally worked very well.  It's an ideology of perpetual revolution and discontent that can never sit still, destroying everything in its wake.  Like a spoiled child, whenever the left doesn't get what it wants, it throws a major temper tantrum and begins crying out for changing the system because it's unfair to leftists in its current form.  This is also what happens when adults whose ideas have become bankrupt and become political losers have nothing left to do.