Sherbrooke writes:
A question. Years ago, watching George W. on t.v. from my perch here north of the border, I saw and heard him say this now-famous phrase: “The Democrat Party.” At first I dismissed it as his usual verbal boneheadedness–and perhaps a way of expressing contempt for the opposition. But I never heard anyone correct it, and now, every time I hear a Republican refer to the “Democrat senator,” “Democrat president” (etc.) I wince. Why have Democrats accepted this? For example, I don’t believe Canada’s New Democratic Party would put up with it from Stephen Harper. And finally, how can Americans respect any party that can’t correctly pronounce the name of the opposition?
Blowhard, Esq.
Callowman
Sherbrooke
Eddie Pensier
Enzo Nakamura
Epaminondas
Fabrizio del Wrongo
Fenster
Brundle Guy
Glynn Marshes
Paleo Retiree
Atypical Neurotic
Question Lady
Sax von Stroheim
Sir Barken Hyena
The Mistaken
Uncouth Reflections 
Wikipedia has a nice and seemingly non-partisan history of the use and misuse of the term here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_%28epithet%29
Seems to go back to the early 1800s in a non-perjorative way, with the slur element growing over time. By 1940 the perjorative aspect was already in full flower. William Safire quoted Wendell Wilkie’s campaign manager as saying the opposition party should not be called Democratic because it was contolled by bosses like “Hague in New Jersey, Pendergast in Missouri and Kelly-Nash in Chicago . . . . [it] should not be called a ‘Democratic Party.’ It should be called the ‘Democrat Party.'”
Some truth to that.
The campaign manager was BTW Harold Stassen:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Stassen
Now all but forgotten except for his name being used to denote a perennial electoral loser.
LikeLike
Very cool, thank you!
LikeLike
Not sure I understand what the big deal is. A senator who is a Democrat is, by definition, a Democrat senator. And hav the Democrats actually accepted” this? If they have, it’s the only thing hey have accepted from Republicans in the last twenty-five years. Probably, the Democratics think that they have more important things to worry about. Most of the American people don’t think that either party is worthy of much respect, and I would tend to agree.
LikeLike
How would you react to “the Republic senator”?
LikeLike
A democrat can be a description of a person, with either a large or a small “D”. A Republic cannot. If a person could be his own Republic, I would have given it a try already. And in any case, since most Democrats out there most certainly do not believe in democracy, and most Republicans have done nothing to save the Republic, I suggest that we start referring to them as “Gang of Corrupt Carrerist Statist Drunks 1” and “Gang of Corrupt Carrerist Statist Drunks 2”. There might be some squabbling as to who got assigned what number, but other than that, I think that it would meet the case admirably.
LikeLike
Well, I’m not crazy about either party at the moment. But let me talk semantics: “Republic” is a noun. So is “Republican.” But “democrat” is only a noun, and the adjective is “Democratic.” You can call me a humourless grammarian (I await your calls and letters!) but if the party itself has always referred to “the Democratic Senator [etc.]” then I think should that should be respected, at least by politicians. (The public can, and should, slang them any way they like.) But a friend of mine named Corin expects to be called that in public, rather than Colin or Karen, etc. In the same spirit, I don’t think “Democratic Party/Senator/President etc.” should be such a challenge for the opposite party.
Then again, I’m Canadian. I think that manners count in public life, and words are part of manners.
Again, the way citizens want to refer to politicians is another matter. I’m going to keep “Careerist Drunks” handy. Maybe I can use it this afternoon. I’m sure the right moment will present itself.
LikeLike
I’ve always assumed that Limbaugh (or someone like that) started calling them that in order to deny them the pleasure of implying they’re more democratic than the other party.
LikeLike
On the other hand, maybe W is just an idiot.
LikeLike
Well, yeah, that too.
LikeLike
Why would I want to respect either party?
LikeLike
“Democrat Party” has been growing stronger for the past two decades. It’s because “democracy” and being “democratic” are perceived to be an unalloyed good. Both parties love to talk about democracy, and “democratic” is a positive adjective attached to all sorts of really nice, fair, levelling things that both parties approve of, often having nothing to do with mass voting. It’s a shibboleth for both R and D. Try suggesting democracy isn’t such a great idea sometime if you don’t believe me. Thus the Republicans are a little bummed that their opponents are called this good thing, and they have sought to make a distinction: it’s not that those shitheads are a Democratic Party (a good thing); they’re just the Democrat Party (shitheads). As for republicanism, there hasn’t been a king in the US for getting on towards 2½ centuries, so nobody cares about that once-considered-good thing, and there’s no reason for the Democrats to discredit the Republican Party’s stupid, meaningless name. Enjoy it in good health, Republicans!
LikeLike
When Commerce Sec. Ron Brown died in a plane crash, Republicans gave the eulogies by referring to Democrat Ron Brown. You can’t back down. By the way, if somebody started the Humanity Party, would it be obligatory to call the members Humanitarians? I think the Republicans have a point.
LikeLike
Sherbrooke, do you really think our NDP would care? I don’t. They get abbreviated ‘NDP’ federally and east of Manitoba/Ontario border, and west as ‘N.D.s’; not even consistently named in that regard!
LikeLike
i.e. provincially, as ‘NDs’ in west and ‘NDP’ in rest; federally as ‘NDP’, never heard anyone refer to the federal party as ‘NDs’, well, at least, not back east, here. 🙂
LikeLike
Shortening to the initials is very common, in and outside government (ODSP for Ontario Disability Support Program, PC for Progressive Conservative, IRS for Internal Revenue Service, ad infinitum) so that doesn’t bother me in the least. But yes, I really do think a lot of people would care if a politician continually referred to the “New Democrat Party.” Supposedly, our politicians have, you know, followed politics, and if they’ve been doing that, saying “New Democratic Party” (or “New Democrat” for an individual) would be automatic.
LikeLike
Oh, it should be automatic, and I’ve never heard any say ‘New Democrat Party’, for that matter; I just can’t imagine anyone getting that incensed about it; we’re more laid-back about a lot of things than our southern friends, you know. 🙂 (Always loved how Dr. Foth called their country ‘the Excited States of America’, heh heh.)
LikeLike
Oh, I don’t think think this would happen in Canada in the first place–and if it did, I don’t think anyone would be incensed. Instead, I think one politician would simply correct the other and that would be that. You know, to keep his opponent from looking plain old stupid. (I agree, “Excited States of America” is very good.)
LikeLike