All politicians and political parties tend to bend their rhetoric and legislative voting toward public opinion (or the opinion of their base). More often than not, they will do this in spite of any long held moral tenets, certainly not because of them. It is easier to get elected or reelected by swaying with what the polls say the public wants. While not ideal, that is still the essence of a democratic republic.
Politicians from both parties do it, but Democrats have developed it into an art. There is video of Democrat leaders in the 1980s and 90s speaking out against illegal immigration. A lot of those same Democrats today are advocating for open borders, amnesty for all illegal aliens as well as full medical coverage among other benefits. When was the last time anyone can remember any Democrat coming out against stopping aliens from illegally crossing our border?
Gay marriage was very unpopular with the voters. Voters in several states voted overwhelmingly against legitimizing gay marriage and many states passed state constitutional bans to same sex marriages. President Bill Clinton signed a Federal Defense of Marriage Act that banned gay marriage. Most Democrats at the time were against same sex marriage or were silent on the subject because of its unpopularity.
When the issue of gun control came to the forefront some decades ago, many Democrat politicians were members of the National Rifle Association. At first, it really was a bipartisan issue. As the media and the Democrat Party drifted more and more left ward fewer members of that party stood up for the Second Amendment. The few gun rights Democrats are most often from states with large gun owning populations.
With the drift to the radical left, the Democrats’ views have evolved into ideas that are not popular with the majority of the public, but do reflect what much of their segmented voter subgroups want. This is one reason why the Democrats want open borders and ex-convicts to vote because it is very difficult to win elections while supporting unpopular policies. To win in this situation, they must expand their voter base.
They also developed a tried and true formula they use to get their way, especially if it is the opposite of what the majority of Americans want. You can take any issue of the last twenty or thirty years and see how the Democrats have won with this formula.
First take a controversial issue like abortion. Back before Roe v Wade was decided only one or two states had legalized abortion. It was unpopular in all but the most liberal states. State legislatures would have passed legalized abortions if the people had wanted it, but because of religious and moral reasons, most states didn’t. Democrats saw that as a challenge. They asked themselves how they could make an unpopular procedure, legal. What the vast majority of people wanted, their elected officials had made illegal through legitimate legislation. That didn’t matter to the Democrats.
Their formula works like this: when the voters and/or their legislators enacted laws that the radical leftests oppose, they go to the courts and find activist judges to declare these laws unconstitutional. In other words, they get judges to act outside their Constitutional role, and usurp the role of the voter elected law makers to overrule the will of the people.
Other than winning in the Supreme Court with the Roe v Wade decision, the radicals have won in court by overruling the will of the people in California on the death penalty, in prohibiting illegal immigrants receiving government benefits and same sex marriage, just to name a few issues. That is why it is so important that judges that are nominated, elected and/or confirmed at the local, state and federal levels are Constitutionalists and will interpret the Constitution and laws as written. Those judges who believe that the Constitution is a “living, breathing document” that must be interpreted in the context of our modern times, not only subvert the will of the people, they prostitute the founding document that has kept us free.