To the editor:
We find ourselves entrenched in a constitutional debacle, with President Trump and Elon Musk seemingly bent on dismantling the separation of powers and throwing the federal government into chaos, all while receiving applause from a GOP Congress lacking backbone. The Times, however, has chosen to spotlight another piece by Josh Hammer, which criticizes the Democratic Party as out of touch with the American populace (“Democrats are drifting dangerously out of sync with the American people,” March 6).
On the surface, these articles might seem to take a balanced “both-sides” perspective by presenting a “liberal” viewpoint alongside Hammer’s. Yet, this approach dangerously skews the political field in times as perilous as anything seen since the Civil War. What we truly need is honesty. Is it really the Democratic Party that has lost its connection?
Hammer largely targeted gender-identity issues, which is just one issue among many. Consistently, surveys show the Democratic Party aligns more closely with public desires than the GOP on various fronts: sensible gun regulations, combating climate change, ensuring wealthy individuals and corporations contribute their fair share of taxes, upholding reproductive rights, preserving social programs for the elderly and those in need, shunning alliances with dictators, and maintaining government services to protect health and public welfare.
I do concede that my party has placed an exaggerated emphasis on gender issues, a sentiment shared by many Democrats. However, the GOP has exploited this to their advantage, perpetually using it and the broader culture war to divert attention from their true actions, which the public generally opposes.
Steven Schechter, Thousand Oaks
To the editor:
Josh Hammer seems to believe anyone who challenges his political stance is un-American, given his confidence that most Americans side with him. He asserts that Democrats faced an “electoral shellacking” last November, overlooking the fact that Trump narrowly won the popular vote, Republicans have just a slim lead in the gerrymandered House, and the Senate is nearly deadlocked. His most offensive claim is the prejudiced remark that people from Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America possess “cultures and customs [that] are antithetical to our own.”
Geoff Kuenning, Claremont
To the editor:
As a seasoned and now-retired political science professor, I must address the historical inaccuracy in Hammer’s claim that the appointment of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson by former President Biden was the first DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) appointment. Ronald Reagan had made a clear campaign promise to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court, which he fulfilled in 1981 with Sandra Day O’Connor. Her career is widely regarded as a successful representation of DEI principles.
Gary Gray, San Diego
To the editor:
I would like to ask Hammer if he envisions any scenario where a Black person can be hired without being labeled a “DEI hire.” What standards must they meet? In an administration riddled with inadequate and inexperienced appointees, we would be fortunate to have “DEI hires” like Jackson and Kamala Harris.
Ray Lancon, San Marino
To the editor:
Hammer champions the GOP’s appeal by claiming it addresses American desires for economic stability, secure borders, and a stable international presence. Yet, Trump’s obsession with tariffs has driven stock markets down and consumer prices up. While the border is fortified, there’s still no comprehensive immigration legislation to tackle expected labor deficits in agriculture and construction due to mass deportations. Meanwhile, Europe and NATO are losing faith in U.S. leadership. Free nations face the threat of enforced annexation by the U.S. The current GOP Congress is complicit in Trump’s pandemonium.
Todd Collart, Ventura
Two pieces in Sunday’s Times—one by Robin Abcarian about Trump’s efforts to reverse social progress and Hammer’s column—exemplify the dichotomy in American politics. Most Americans find themselves in the center of this complex issue, dismissing the extremes of both political parties as unappealing and disruptive to the nation’s welfare.
Allen Humphries, Indio
