Behind Closed Doors: How Democrats and Republicans Really See Each Other

The political divide extends beyond policy—it’s a clash of perception. One side views the other as deplorable human beings, while the other sees a threat to societal stability.

Disclaimer: This is an anecdotal opinion piece based on real events, but it may not fully represent the views or experiences of an entire group.

TO this day, what fascinates me most about maintaining an independent political outlook is the unique insight it provides into the core beliefs of both Democrats and Republicans.

Online platforms regularly expose these divergent worldviews as news events unfold, with each side drawing partisan lines and crafting its talking points. There’s no mystery about how Democrats perceive Republicans, or vice versa. But there’s a striking difference in how each party expresses these convictions when the opposition isn’t physically present. In these moments, the fundamental divide between conservatives and liberals becomes unmistakable: one side sees its opponents as morally irredeemable, while the other views them as champions of dangerous ideologies capable of destabilizing society.

Over the past decade, I’ve been fortunate to form close connections across the political spectrum. I’ve had some of the most insightful and enriching conversations with acquaintances ranging from traditional Republicans to staunch MAGA supporters. At the same time, I’ve built sibling-like bonds with those whose views align more closely with the Left and the Democratic Party.

For me, as long as both sides are willing to engage in good-faith dialogue and remain open to new ideas—even from those they disagree with—the conversation is always worthwhile. Everyone leaves the exchange having learned something new.

But not everyone approaches political conversations with this mindset. My independent, anti-establishment outlook has given me a firsthand view of how both parties speak about each other when the opposition isn’t in the room. One of the advantages of being politically unaligned is the rare opportunity to see into the minds of both liberals and conservatives—like a fly on the wall, privy to insights that would otherwise remain hidden.

When liberals feel comfortable around you—especially if, like me, you’re black, and they assume by default that you’re on the Left (an intellectually lazy assumption)—they tend to speak freely and boldly about their politics, often signaling their ideological leanings without hesitation. In private, one-on-one conversations, I’ve noticed that liberals instinctively try to build camaraderie by sharing views they assume will resonate with you. Rarely do they pause to gauge where you actually stand politically before launching into tirades about how “evil,” “stupid,” “racist,” “white-supremacist,” “bigoted,” or “Nazi-like” Republicans, Trump supporters, and Joe Rogan listeners are. Their worldview seems to leave little room for the possibility that they could ever be misguided, intolerant (despite their professed commitment to tolerance and acceptance), or lacking in humanity. And so, they declare their beliefs loudly and confidently.

In these moments, I’m always struck by the lack of self-awareness—it never seems to occur to them to pause and consider whether the very people they’re casually insulting might be sitting right in front of them. I often think to myself, What if I were a Republican or a Trump supporter? Or a Joe Rogan listener (which, for the record, I actually am—so this one really stung when I heard it)? How am I supposed to view you now, after you’ve just dismissed my intelligence and my entire identity to my face?

Liberals often wonder why they’re perceived as unlikeable—perhaps it has something to do with their casual habit of hurling insults at those they disagree with, sometimes unknowingly in their presence. The sheer disregard for others’ political beliefs or interests is staggering. I’ve lost count of the times I’ve witnessed this as the default behavior.

One instance stands out: A gentleman I once assisted in a physical therapy clinic, unaware of my political stance, bluntly asked me, “How is it that you get along with everyone here? Does every patient happen to share the same beliefs, or am I just incapable of getting along with Trump supporters, who I believe are vile and immoral?”

When I challenged him, gently urging him to reconsider his choice of words to describe people who simply vote differently—and might even be present in the room—he seemed genuinely baffled, unable to grasp what was so wrong about his statement.

In another instance, a father of a young boy I once cared for told me—almost as if he were trying to prove his sincerity and love for black people—that he wished Obama could have served a third term instead of “the monster” (aka Trump) who’d taken office from 2016 to 2020. My political views had never come up, yet he spoke with absolute certainty that I must have agreed with him. I simply nodded along, not particularly bothered. But I often imagine that situations like this unfold every day in the presence of conservatives, who are left with little choice but to bite their tongues or engage in verbal conflict.

The irony wasn’t lost on me, especially since this happened not long after the release of Get Out, Jordan Peele’s breakout film, which depicted a similarly awkward racial dynamic. If only that father knew how much I detested Obama’s presidency, what he represents as a political figure, and his legacy altogether. I could go on—there are many such cases.

On the other side of the aisle, conservatives tend to approach private, one-on-one conversations with more caution. As a minority institutionally, they are more aware of the power dynamics at play. For example, studies in higher education show that the liberal-to-conservative ratio among professors ranges from 5:1 to 12:1, depending on the field and institution. This reality creates a heightened sense of caution among conservatives in intimate conversations. Their reluctance to reveal their political views, unless necessary, is a direct result of navigating environments where liberal ideologies dominate.

In 2020, I worked alongside a woman who turned out to be a staunch Trump supporter. She must have assumed I was a hardcore Leftist because we barely spoke during our long drives. We never discussed politics—or anything, really—until I overheard her sharing her thoughts on the incoming Biden administration and the outgoing Trump administration. Suddenly, I was curious and asked her to elaborate on her views about Trump, Biden, COVID-19 lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and more. Before long, she felt comfortable opening up in a way she hadn’t with anyone else. It was rare that someone took enough interest to genuinely ask her about her views. We spent our workdays listening to her favorite conservative radio stations, diving into deep conversations about our shared beliefs and disagreements. Sometimes, she convinced me of her perspective; other times, she acknowledged mine. And often, we intellectually sparred, but respected each other’s stances. It was a beautiful dynamic—a true representation of a healthy, engaging dialogue between two people with vastly different worldviews. Her views weren’t an invitation to scold or insult her perspective or humanity. Instead, they were an invitation to understand how she thinks, what she believes, and how it shapes her choices—along with those of many others like her.

When I reflect on my intimate conversations with conservatives—whether or not they were aware of my anti-establishment political views—one thing stands out: they rarely resort to publicly shaming or lashing out at liberals. Instead, their critiques tend to focus on policy issues and ideological stances within liberal circles that they believe have gone too far. Their criticism is usually substantive, not personal.

If liberals adopted a more substantive critique of conservatives, rather than resorting to disparaging remarks, they could not only strengthen their base but also appeal to a disaffected electorate. Differing political views are inevitable, but they should never come at the cost of dehumanizing the opposition simply because they hold different beliefs or vote differently.

Then again, what do I know?

---