Back in 2004, writer John Rogers mentioned how much he missed Republicans: “Sober men in suits, pipes, who’d nod thoughtfully over their latest tract on market-driven fiscal conservatism while grinding out the numbers on rocket science. Remember those serious-looking 1950’s-1960’s science guys in the movies — Republican to a one. They were the grown-ups. They were the realists. Sure they were a bummer, maaaaan, but on the way to La Revolution you need somebody to remember where you parked the car.”
Instead, we had the insanity of the W years: incompetence, opposition to science, a stupid never-ending war waged for stupid reasons (almost certainly including that W, by his own admission, wanted to be a War President), massive military spending that benefited contractors more than those who served … And two years later, in another post, Rogers concluded things had not improved.
The trouble is, that really doesn’t register with voters. A couple of months back I wrote about how Democrats not only struggle with Republicans but with the imaginary Democrats in people’s heads:

Here’s a related comment from Lawyers, Guns and Money on the “activist class” mentioned above.
(There’s also sexism towards “wine moms” in this — women just can’t be authentic working-class liberals, you know!).
The media also endorse this portrayal, as do the Sensible Centrist Democrats (see my comments Monday on Very Serious People). Dems must moderate their supposedly ultra-liberal policies, or to denounce party members who are supposedly too extreme, like Zohran Mamdani. Possibly the Imaginary Democrats are why one conservative NYC district voted for him: someone concerned about lowering their cost of living must be a conservative.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, a senseless centrist, just declared the federal deficit is the result of socialist polices, not the Toddler’s tax cuts (did his imaginary Long Island voters tell him that?). It never registers that even centrist Dems will be turned into Imaginary Ultra-Liberal Democrats, no matter how centrist they are. And the media will always treat the left-wing of the party as an inconsequential fluke. I doubt Joe Manchin’s efforts to push liberals to the center will get the same scrutiny.
At the same time, Dems have to run not against the Toddler, Vance and their ilk but against the the imaginary Republicans who are the polar opposite of the imaginary Democrats. The fantasy Republicans are the stereotype Rogers write about. Sensible guys (never women. They’re the daddy party after all)who always balance the budget, know how to manage the economy, believe in a strong defense and a tough-but-fair legal system. They’re battle-experienced veterans who support the military, unlike the Democrats who all protested the Vietnam War and spat on the troops coming home. Imaginary Republicans believe in America and they put their country first. They don’t believe in a nanny state regulating everything but trust Americans to make their own decisions. As witness this piece on JD Vance presenting him and his party as sensible mainstream Americans (small wonder Vance and Marco Rubio aren’t suffering from the Toddler’s unpopularity).
As plenty of bloggers and liberal pundits have pointed out, this image doesn’t seem to die. Never mind that Reagan, W and now the Toddler all set record deficits. Reagan’s 1980s economy went through a recession and the poor wound up poorer because of his policies (I was poor. I know). Reagan’s attorney general Ed Meese said we shouldn’t worry about the rights of the accused because if the police accuse someone, they’re guilty. As for regulation, it’s Wilhoit’s law: conservatives don’t want government telling them what to do but they’re fine with regulations that hurt gays, Muslims, women, etc. (even though members of all of those groups exist in the Republican tent). Speaker Mike Johnson is fine with Republican red ink but eager to gut Social Security. As for the military, the draft-dodging W (who also blew off his National Guard service) squandered hundreds of soldiers’ lives in Iraq; the Toddler is exhausting our armaments in Iran. Lots of Republicans avoided the draft but somehow it was only an issue for Bill Clinton (probably because only Democrats have agency — Republicans can’t be held responsible for being hypocrites).
I’d like to hope things are changing. It’s tempting for people to imagine the Toddler is the problem and the rest of his administration and its enablers will turn into the Imaginary Republicans once he’s gone. They won’t. People have been predicting for more than 15 years their right-ward march would end soon. It hasn’t. Here’s some recent examples:
The Toddler is now thinking about more budget-busting tax cuts. Which will become a serious problem once a Democrat is in the White House.
Strong on crime? The Toddler’s pay-for-a-pardon corruption has cost victims of crime $1.7 billion because pardon recipients don’t have to repay any of their ill-gotten gains.
Supporting the troops? Well, no.
Deep religious faith? “Faith groups suing President Donald Trump’s administration filed a motion Thursday (Aug. 20)alleging the Department of Homeland Security committed “multiple egregious violations” of a court order that largely barred warrantless surveillance at their churches.”
Have I mentioned the Toddler has threatened to bomb our ally Oman?
Fixing housing problems? The Toddler finds that a big yawn.
Sensible and moderate? If you ignore the party’s Nazi wing. Or their odious misogyny.
The Toddler is far and away the biggest pimple on the face of our democracy but he’s not the problem. His entire rancid party is. Like Rogers, I miss the sensible Republicans but there’s no point in pretending they’re ever coming back. As I put in 2022, “Republicans aren’t interested in compromise. They haven’t been interested in it for years. And they do want to end democracy, in favor of a banana republic where they can do what they damn well please to the rest of us. Or so they imagine.”

















