February 17 2026, 08:15 
After Donald Trump released a blatantly racist video depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as apes in a jungle, a Trump voter from New Mexico called into C-SPAN’s Washington Journal on Friday, February 6, and, attempting to hold back tears said:
“Oh, my word. I am a registered Republican,” he began. “My dad was the president of American Pipeliners Association, so I came by it rather naturally. Voted for the president, supported him. But I really want to apologize. I mean, I’m looking at this awful picture of the Obamas. What an embarrassment to our country.”
Related
“All this man does is tell lies,” the caller continued. “He is not worthy of the presidency. He takes bribes blatantly. And now he’s being a racist, blatantly. They were supposed to deport the dangerous criminals. They were not supposed to go after small children, storm schools, bring terror upon, you know, the little kids and the women and children, not just the immigrants in the school. All the children are scared.”
The caller stated how sorry he was for voting for Trump during the last three presidential elections.
Dive deeper every day
Join our newsletter for thought-provoking commentary that goes beyond the surface of LGBTQ+ issues
Subscribe to our Newsletter today
“He’s pathetic as a president. And I just want to apologize to everybody in the country for supporting this rotten man.”
After hearing this caller’s pain and remorse, and knowing that virtually all religious and spiritual philosophical foundations center on the concept of forgiveness, I wrote a short meme on my social media platforms.
If you ever voted for Trump and are sorry, apologies accepted here if you vow to vote all Democratic in 2026 & 2028.
The overwhelming majority of responses I received were positive. A very few obvious Trump/MAGA supporters roundly criticized me (and the Democratic Party) while attempting to rationalize the Trump administration’s policies and further attacking the Obamas.
A small minority, though, decried my statement from the left side of the political spectrum. This respondent does a good job summarizing that sentiment: “We need to vote Leftist! Not Republican, Not Democrat! They are 2 sides of the same coin! They both support Imperialism, Capitalism, Zionism, Prison Industrial Complex, and Military Industrial Complex! Democrats are actually Center-Right on the political compass. We need a president that’s actually on the left wing such as Democratic Socialism or Green Party.”
I did not comment on this person’s specific claims, and I did not share my political background. However, I do agree with many of the person’s points.
All of my adult life, I saw myself as a “Democratic Socialist” even before I heard the term. I value the Scandinavian governmental political model.
Unfortunately, the United States of America has always existed as a center-right country. Though the fulcrum shifts at times, the distance of the pivot is relatively narrow.
Socialism can be defined as “a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole,” where each of us has a stake and advances in the success of our collective economy.
I responded to the person who challenged my meme by writing, “If you’re waiting for a political candidate or party to promise and give you a Utopia before you will vote for them, you’re destined to get a Dystopia.”
This is why we find ourselves in this desperate political moment. While most MAGA voters were willing to overlook Trump’s so-called “faith and family” transgressions, many potential Democratic voters refused to cast their ballots because they found some faults in candidates like Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, or in the Democratic Party overall because it was not “left” enough.
I have worked most of my life to bring the United States into closer alignment with a Democratic Socialist vision. But one simply cannot wait for the perfect candidate before engaging in the political process.
One must work to develop the infrastructure to usher in a political party that aligns more closely with one’s political perspective, while simultaneously acting pragmatically by donating to, working for, and voting for candidates and parties that can at least limit or halt our decline into autocracy.
Some call this “voting for the lesser of two evils,” and yes, I find this has often been the case.
But it’s more than that, too.
While my candidate, Eugene McCarthy, won by far the largest percentage of the popular vote in the Democratic general primaries in 1968’s crowded field of candidates (whereas Humphrey didn’t even bother to enter some of the state primaries), Democratic Party officials gave Humphrey the right to carry the Democratic banner as its presidential nominee.
The Democratic National Committee did this by awarding Humphrey the vast majority of overall delegates in the non-primary states, thereby bringing him over the top in terms of the number of delegates needed. This despite the fact that McCarthy earned 38.7% of the popular vote, compared to Humphrey’s 2.2%.
Talk about rigged elections.
By the time the election came around in November, I was so angry and discouraged by the electoral process that I decided that if I were going to maintain any sense of integrity and ethical standards, I could not and would not vote for anyone that year, even though I considered Humphrey less reprehensible than Richard Nixon.
The day before election day, two friends and I drove south down Highway 1 along the beautiful California coastline. We camped and played our acoustic guitars and violin beneath ancient redwood trees overlooking the waves of Big Sur. Two days later, as we returned to San José State University, we chose to remain unaware of the election results.
At the time, I did not regret my decision to opt out. I didn’t even feel troubled by losing all the points on the surprise pop quiz given by the professor in my Music Conducting class. My integrity remained intact.
At least that’s what I thought. Then I reflected on the potential consequences and the actual realities of a Nixon presidency.
For five additional years, the body bags carrying the fallen continued to pile up. The people of Vietnam, combatants and civilians alike, continued suffering the horrors of incinerated flesh and fields scorched from the massive airdrops of Agent Orange by U.S. bombers, increasing the already massive profits of Dow Chemical Company and other corporations.
Race relations worsened, as did the already large wage and wealth gaps between socioeconomic classes. Charges of corruption and bribery against Vice President Agnew and his resignation from office, combined with Nixon’s involvement in Watergate and his eventual resignation, further divided the country.
So, in retrospect, I perennially ask myself, “By failing even to vote for ‘the lesser of two evils’ in 1968, did I really maintain my sense of integrity, and did I serve the best interests of the country?”
Looking back, I realize that in 1968, at the age of 21, I was functioning on a dualistic or binary cognitive developmental level. I perceived the world, people, and events as either “good” or “bad,” and pragmatism as “surrender.” Viewing both Humphrey and Nixon as “bad,” I believed that I could not honestly vote for either without surrendering my ideals and ethical standards.
Using this event as a constant touchstone in my personal history, I now understand the cosmos more in its multiplicity and nuances. I see it along a continuum rather than as a binary. I also often consider pragmatism not so much as surrender, but more as a compromise and as a necessary give and take in a democracy.
Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.