Read more at https://theblacksphere.net/2025/08/democrats-should-skip-midterms/
As if we really needed President Trump dropping bombs on Iran to expose the Leftists in America.
The man did what almost every president before him has done, and Democrats are showing why they are the party of the ass. But before we get too wrapped up in what’s happening today, let’s remember Democrats’ recent shenanigans. But let’s begin in 1992 and work our way up.
The Los Angeles riots of 1992 were a flashpoint in American history, sparked by the acquittal of four police officers in the beating of Rodney King. Fast-forward to today, and riots in LA and other Democrat strongholds have become a grim rerun, a tired trope in the Left’s political theater.
But this isn’t about the riots themselves—yawn, they’re as predictable as a Hollywood sequel. What’s fascinating is the damage they’ve done to the Democratic Party, a self-inflicted wound festering with every chant, every Molotov cocktail, and every sanctimonious tweet from the Left’s moral high ground. Let’s unpack how the Democrats have turned their own playbook into a political suicide note, with a nod to the idea that Leftists seem to have a fetish for backing insanity over common sense.
The Riots as a Metaphor for Leftist Chaos
Riots aren’t just about broken windows or looted stores; they’re a metaphor for the Democrats’ broader strategy—or lack thereof. Leftist-controlled cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle have become petri dishes for lawlessness, where policies coddle criminals and illegal immigrants while ignoring the pleas of law-abiding citizens. From judges harboring illegals who’ve committed heinous crimes to congressmen jetting across continents to retrieve equally vile offenders, the Left’s obsession with defying immigration laws is a masterclass in self-sabotage. Take, for instance, the case of San Francisco’s sanctuary city policies, which have shielded violent offenders from deportation, only to see them reoffend. The arrest of complicit judges is a start, but America is still waiting for the politicians who thwart our laws to face the music.
Why do Democrats persist in this madness? Polls scream they’re on the wrong side of the issue—60% of Americans support stronger border enforcement. Yet, like a toddler throwing a tantrum in a grocery store, they double down. It’s not just stubbornness; it’s a pathological commitment to insanity, as if they’re auditioning for a remake of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. The riots are the inevitable outcome of this mindset: create chaos, then pose as the savior.
Sadly, for them, they didn’t anticipate someone like President Trump. He’s the guy who steps in to actually quell the unrest. And when he’s successful, the Left loses its collective mind. They’re not mad about the riots; they’re mad they’re losing control.
The Power Grab Behind the Chaos
Let’s talk numbers, because math doesn’t lie, even if politicians do. The Democrats’ grip on power is tethered to illegal immigration. With roughly 760,000 people per congressional seat and an estimated 40 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., the math is stark: every 760,000 deportations costs the Democrats a seat. That’s 50 congressional seats, give or take, propped up by fraudulent representation. It’s not about compassion; it’s about votes, power, and control. The riots? They’re a distraction, a smokescreen to keep the public from noticing the real game.
Matt Walsh nailed it with his sardonic tweet:
“Wait. American troops are defending American cities rather than defending random countries in the Middle East? Outrage!”
The Left’s outrage isn’t about principle; it’s about losing their carefully curated narrative. When Trump secures the border and deports illegal immigrants at a record pace, he’s not just solving a problem—he’s dismantling the Democrats’ electoral machine. The word is out: America is closed to illegal immigration, and the Left is scrambling to rewrite the script.
As if we really needed President Trump dropping bombs on Iran to expose the Leftists in America.
The man did what almost every president before him has done, and Democrats are showing why they are the party of the ass. But before we get too wrapped up in what’s happening today, let’s remember Democrats’ recent shenanigans. But let’s begin in 1992 and work our way up.
The Los Angeles riots of 1992 were a flashpoint in American history, sparked by the acquittal of four police officers in the beating of Rodney King. Fast-forward to today, and riots in LA and other Democrat strongholds have become a grim rerun, a tired trope in the Left’s political theater.
But this isn’t about the riots themselves—yawn, they’re as predictable as a Hollywood sequel. What’s fascinating is the damage they’ve done to the Democratic Party, a self-inflicted wound festering with every chant, every Molotov cocktail, and evThe Riots as a Metaphor for Leftist Chaos
Riots aren’t just about broken windows or looted stores; they’re a metaphor for the Democrats’ broader strategy—or lack thereof. Leftist-controlled cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle have become petri dishes for lawlessness, where policies coddle criminals and illegal immigrants while ignoring the pleas of law-abiding citizens. From judges harboring illegals who’ve committed heinous crimes to congressmen jetting across continents to retrieve equally vile offenders, the Left’s obsession with defying immigration laws is a masterclass in self-sabotage. Take, for instance, the case of San Francisco’s sanctuary city policies, which have shielded violent offenders from deportation, only to see them reoffend. The arrest of complicit judges is a start, but America is still waiting for the politicians who thwart our laws to face the music.
Why do Democrats persist in this madness? Polls scream they’re on the wrong side of the issue—60% of Americans support stronger border enforcement. Yet, like a toddler throwing a tantrum in a grocery store, they double down. It’s not just stubbornness; it’s a pathological commitment to insanity, as if they’re auditioning for a remake of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. The riots are the inevitable outcome of this mindset: create chaos, then pose as the savior.
Sadly for them, they didn’t anticipate someone like President Trump. He’s the guy who steps in to actually quell the unrest. And when he’s successful, the Left loses its collective mind. They’re not mad about the riots; they’re mad they’re losing control.
The Power Grab Behind the Chaos
Let’s talk numbers, because math doesn’t lie, even if politicians do. The Democrats’ grip on power is tethered to illegal immigration. With roughly 760,000 people per congressional seat and an estimated 40 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., the math is stark: every 760,000 deportations costs the Democrats a seat.
That’s 50 congressional seats, give or take, propped up by fraudulent representation. It’s not about compassion; it’s about votes, power, and control. The riots? They’re a distraction, a smokescreen to keep the public from noticing the real game.
Matt Walsh nailed it with his sardonic tweet:
“Wait. American troops are defending American cities rather than defending random countries in the Middle East? Outrage!”
The Left’s outrage isn’t about principle; it’s about losing their carefully curated narrative. When Trump secures the border and deports illegal immigrants at a record pace, he’s not just solving a problem—he’s dismantling the Democrats’ electoral machine. The word is out: America is closed to illegal immigration, and the Left is scrambling to rewrite the script.
At Yale University, last week, a number of members of the Black Student Alliance physically surrounded an administrator and berated him for standing up for free speech and are now demanding his resignation. Caught on camera, one can easily see how dangerous the situation was.
In another example, the president of the University of Missouri, Tim Wolfe, has resigned. His resignation comes after more than 30 members of the football team threatened not to play unless he was forced out. Their claim was that, in unspecified ways, Wolfe failed to eradicate “structural racism” on campus.
These situations have much in common, and the story is becoming a familiar one.
First;
Both situations involve student activists disrupting education, allegedly on behalf of education. At Yale, the activists claimed that allowing free discourse and debate and challenging their assumptions threatened the “safe space” they thought Yale was.
At Mizzou, activists claimed that failing to deal with “structural racism” was harming their education. Both groups of students listed not specific harms, but rather vague interests in feeling good at their university.
Second;
Both situations involve administrators being asked to clamp down on the free expression of other students. At Yale, students were upset that Yale administrators were not clamping down on Halloween costumes. At Mizzou, students wanted more unspecified action against perceived racism on campus.
Third;
Both situations involve menacing groups of students that come very close to physical violence. At Yale, for example, students physically encircled the administrator, shouted him down, and got very close to him in a threatening manner. At Mizzou, students physically surrounded the car of Wolfe and demanded he exit the vehicle into the mob.
This pattern is becoming more prevalent on American campuses. In the name of education, education is being disrupted by intolerant student activists, harming the experience for everyone else. At my alma mater, New York University Law School, a small cadre of students is complaining about Halloween decorations that included a man hanging from a noose, because such a decoration was “harmful suicide imagery.”
If one accepted all of the claims and agreed with the political aims of the student activists, one might think it advisable to close such unrepentantly bigoted universities down.
A more moderate response by university officials, however, would be to take their job as educators seriously. If a student seeks to disrupt the safety or education of another student, punish the disruptor.
If that were to happen, colleges would once again become “safe spaces” for free thought and expression.
This piece has been updated to state that Jonathan L. Butler’s hunger strike was for 7 days.