A good place to start is to assume that working class white people:
1. Aren’t the stereotype educated liberals assume them to be. They’re not the poor miners and assembly line workers of yesteryear who rightfully saw themselves as exploited because sustenance was a pressing issue for them. They’re largely middle class people who live comfortably and have free time.
2. Are culturally reactionary because as people who don’t possess advanced degrees, they see the arrival of newcomers underneath them (immigrants) as competition and threats instead of people to be in solidarity with.
3. See Donald Trump as someone to aspire to, not someone who is exploiting them.
4. Vote for Republicans because they want to punch down, not up.
My guess is that it isn’t a matter of finding people that look or act a certain way as much as it is a matter of finding specific policy items that appeal to said voters and being forthright with how they can help him with their pain points. Also, a lot of it will be a matter of breaking through reactionary suspicions first, not getting votes.
I'm 42 and have very fond memories of John McCain (as the last true republican hero).
I also idolize Jon Stewart as a beacon of truth. He's been calling out Fox BS for 25+ years. Jon's show a few weeks back with Jack Smith is must see/hear conversation for every American.
I had a weird experience listening to Jon and Mamdani just now. They're trying to talk about all this silly branding nuance. I can't remember the last time I dropped Stewart 10 minutes in...
It's simple. Ossoff, Slotkin, and many others are catching on.
Call out the gross corruption and incompetence in front of our faces. Be in the media daily with easy takedowns on indefensible Republicans.
I'm a lot more concerned about Todd Blanche getting confirmed tomorrow than I am about anyone on the political left of John McCain.
Laura, you are, of course, omitting the part about how moderate/centrist democrats are attacking progressives across the board. With people like Amy Siskind saying that if El-Sayed (who is not a member of the DSA) wins the primary in Michigan she will lobby, through her connections, the DSCC to strip all funding from him because he "can't win." Then she and others will get to claim "SEE! I told you he would lose!" Of course ignoring the fact she helped him lose by cutting off funds. Or James Carville, who said all Progressives should leave the Democratic Party; which seems bad to me because 35-40 % of the party are Progressives.
It's amazing that people at The Bulwark and the Moderate Democrats are still claiming they want a "big tent" - and all are welcome. Except the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. If the Progressives were to actually do that and leave the Democratic Party, then we would lose the midterms, and the 2028 election cycle.
How did FDR a champion of the working class? By focusing on populist financial issues and the common man being taken advantage of by the powers that be.
No culture war BS. No DSA proclamations about Zionism. No open borders, abolish the police, and the rest of the "sounds great at the time" stuff that in reality, results in terrible outcomes.
When the "working class" thinks about the left, their first image is of some college student scolding older folks for not knowing all 9 pronouns. Not someone standing up for them against the oligarchs who are making billions off of their backs.
I was more optimistic about the Dem Socialist resurgence before I actually went on the DSA website and read their platform. It turns out that the people on the Right calling DSA "commujists" are not that far off. There may be academic distinctions between communism and the DSA's platform, but they are lost on me. I don't think most people, working class or not, want the end of police and private property.
How many millions of people were murdered by the state in the USSR, China, and Cuba? All to stifle dissent from those unhappy with their terrible quality of life and lack of freedoms. All while the elites lived in luxury: oligarchy by another form. Who would want to emulate that? Capitalism, as flawed and in need of regulation as it is, is still the least-worst option.
One of the few progressive operatives who was willing to be more candid about the challenge in reaching working-class voters was pollster Adam Carlson.
Perhaps they need to attack their own party... At least somewhat. I mean a) a lot -- they're essentially trump, b) some -squishy version, c) a little but (shhh) it's all part of the plan my fellow Dems
Maybe "b" or "c" because if it's "a" Dems have lost these people for a long time.
If Democrats would stop talking about giving people free this and free that and not requiring them to earn it, they are going to keep losing. By earn it I mean you do not necessarily have to be an executive or professional but you cannot sit around on your butt all day and watch TV and expect someone else to pay for your laziness. I studied the labor movement in College, some of my own ancestors were one of the first labor organizers. They were proud of thier, they never offered FREE TO ANYONE. THEY ALWAYS SAID IF YOU ARE WILLING TO WORK THEN GET YOU SHOULD GET REWARDED. IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO WORK YOU DO NOT DESERVE ANYTHING. Now work is relative. You can take care of other worker's kids if that is what you can do. You can pack books if that is what you can do. But you cannot sit around all day and watch TV and eat popcorn.
"If the left is the working-people faction of the party but working people don’t vote for its candidates, then what really are they?"
The answer has been obvious for a while --> phonies.
The progressive far-left and the DSA (am I allowed to plug the Atlantic on here? Their article calling the DSA parasites is highly recommended) are a symptom of the elitism that has hijacked higher education. They are mostly college grads from elite or elite-adjacent schools steeped in the idea that they (no matter how young they might be) know everything because they graduated from these schools. They are usually quite high income, but are angry that their high incomes don't get them more in the expensive coastal cities in which they live (their version of "affordability"). They know what's good for the working class because their seminars on Marxism *being good actually* taught them everything they need to know about what the working class _should_ want. While themselves wanting all the creature comforts of high income capitalism, of course.
Yes, I am exaggerating. But not by as much as I wish I was.
Likewise their most important foreign policy position is hating on Israel (because that is what a struggling farmer in Iowa cares about the most -- Palestine!) and the best way to help with home ownership is to cancel student loans (which the majority of Americans don't have).
Medicare for All, which polls abysmally when explained to regular people, because that's the system we would want if designing one in a vacuum.
I have been a liberal forever. I'm not a former conservative like some on here (no shade, just respect) and I used to believe the leftists were allies in making the world a better place. It's become abundantly clear that actually, this legion of tankies is as much of a threat as MAGA; indeed some of them are as illiberal and as dismissive of democracy as the MAGA true believers. The ones that aren't are still going to hand the country to MAGA. They are not allies. They are opponents.
My response is in line with the Atlantic article -- these are "allies" we don't want, throw them out.
“It has been a pretty big lie people [have] told themselves on here [on X] that working class people are closet leftists…” They have been telling themselves that long before X came along, like maybe since Marx and Engles handed out their first pamphlets.
- The modern working class is not defined by unions (we crushed most of those in the 80s). They're defined by education attainment.
- This group, because they do not have union protections, are deeply skeptical of any global engagement, very protectionist, nationalist and culturally reactionary.
- This means populist messaging is extremely effective. Trump's great adaptation was to say tariffs and "American jobs" a lot.
The real explainer is cultural issues, not just appearance. The Democratic Party is correct to support minorities (my biased coastal elite view), but ~40% of our electorate are down with a platform that is probably a huge non-starter for Democrats. History teaches us that cultural issues vastly outweigh economics. I wish this wasn't true, but there are countless examples in our 250 year history where people deliberately accept being "poorer" in order to be slightly higher in a hierarchy (which still hurts them). Social capital is more important than real capital or values (hooray humans).
The solution here is to do two things (my view, open to pushback):
1. The Jon Ossoff - tie everyday issues to the pain voters feel. Most of these voters view the rich guys like Trump or Musk as ideals they aspire to. They don't see these guys as part of a corrupt system, they think they can be them...if those darn bureaucrats go away. This is false, but perception = reality.
2. Everything is culture - winning over more apolitical aspects of culture is really important. You need to drive down negatives. The target here are the losses Dems had with latinos, asians, and a portion of young men.
While the other party talks about how many sexes there are, do you have trouble paying for healthcare or food? What is more important, how many sexes there are or how much money you have at the end of the month?
Read through my comment again. Cultural issues have often overridden economic concerns. This boils down to:
1) Some people will forsake sacred cows for practical benefits
2) Some people will forego practical benefits if their “station” in a societal hierarchy rises
Take the inverse: would we be willing to shove gay people into the closet if we got universal healthcare and a strong safety net for everyone? I don’t think so. Therein lies the impasse. One group wants to expand liberty, the other wishes to restrict it - but a lot of people enjoy restricting the liberty of others. Open democracies and liberalism are a positive aberration on human history. Most of the time, governments are repressive autocracies.
I think it's an indictment of American culture and character that we even give a crap about this when *waves hands* everything else is going on. That said, you're right. Womp womp.
It is not that complicated why WORKING CLASS VOTERS are dissatisfied with the Democratic party. The key term here is WORKING CLASS. THESE PEOPLE HAVE JOBS, THEY WORK FOR A LIVING. They do not live off welfare or other special benefits for people who do not seem interested in working for a living for whatever reason. My son has a disability but he still chooses to Work. It is not glamourous work, it is manual labor but he has the pride in himself not to be a burden on the government for everything. If that means engaging in manual labor so be it. His family is very proud of him and shows it. Maybe that is part of the problem, people are not emotionally rewarded for "working" for a living anymore. Everyone seems to be in it, to get the most that they can get with the LEAST EFFORT. My son is not that way and neither are his friends, but it seems like there are some people out there that want something for nothing. If they get something for nothing, then someone ELSE HAS TO PAY FOR IT. SOMEONE HAS TO PAY, AND If you do not pay, then someone else is going to have to pay in your place and that is not fair.
Every “socialist” and “leftist” I know are lazy, good for nothings who exist solely off their parents success often from things that soley are possible in a capitalist society. I work my ass off and I’m college educated, I’ve been on disability once when I fractured my collarbone. Right now I don’t have a permanent job, so I’m doing side work as much as I can to pay the bills. It’s not glorious, but I agree with your son, I don’t wanna be someone’s burden or have someone else pay my way so I can fuck off and travel. Most working class people are this way, at least all the ones I know. There should be a social safety net, but what these leftists propose is often over the top and again, who’s gonna pay for it?
The best thing journalists can do at the WHCD with Trump attending is not to go.
A good place to start is to assume that working class white people:
1. Aren’t the stereotype educated liberals assume them to be. They’re not the poor miners and assembly line workers of yesteryear who rightfully saw themselves as exploited because sustenance was a pressing issue for them. They’re largely middle class people who live comfortably and have free time.
2. Are culturally reactionary because as people who don’t possess advanced degrees, they see the arrival of newcomers underneath them (immigrants) as competition and threats instead of people to be in solidarity with.
3. See Donald Trump as someone to aspire to, not someone who is exploiting them.
4. Vote for Republicans because they want to punch down, not up.
My guess is that it isn’t a matter of finding people that look or act a certain way as much as it is a matter of finding specific policy items that appeal to said voters and being forthright with how they can help him with their pain points. Also, a lot of it will be a matter of breaking through reactionary suspicions first, not getting votes.
LBJ put in best, make the lowest white man feel more important than the most accomplished colored man, he will let you pick his pockets.
I'm 42 and have very fond memories of John McCain (as the last true republican hero).
I also idolize Jon Stewart as a beacon of truth. He's been calling out Fox BS for 25+ years. Jon's show a few weeks back with Jack Smith is must see/hear conversation for every American.
I had a weird experience listening to Jon and Mamdani just now. They're trying to talk about all this silly branding nuance. I can't remember the last time I dropped Stewart 10 minutes in...
It's simple. Ossoff, Slotkin, and many others are catching on.
Call out the gross corruption and incompetence in front of our faces. Be in the media daily with easy takedowns on indefensible Republicans.
I'm a lot more concerned about Todd Blanche getting confirmed tomorrow than I am about anyone on the political left of John McCain.
Laura, you are, of course, omitting the part about how moderate/centrist democrats are attacking progressives across the board. With people like Amy Siskind saying that if El-Sayed (who is not a member of the DSA) wins the primary in Michigan she will lobby, through her connections, the DSCC to strip all funding from him because he "can't win." Then she and others will get to claim "SEE! I told you he would lose!" Of course ignoring the fact she helped him lose by cutting off funds. Or James Carville, who said all Progressives should leave the Democratic Party; which seems bad to me because 35-40 % of the party are Progressives.
It's amazing that people at The Bulwark and the Moderate Democrats are still claiming they want a "big tent" - and all are welcome. Except the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. If the Progressives were to actually do that and leave the Democratic Party, then we would lose the midterms, and the 2028 election cycle.
Are their true colors shining through?
If the Democratic Party, or more
precisely, those who run it, want to
think about how to attract working
class voters they should think first
of how they lost them.
They pretty much did in 1968.
By the 90's with their neoliberalism
the game was pretty much over.
Clinton, depending on which crowd
he was talking to, would say that
he was in favor of universal health
care for instance.
Which was a big issue and had
support of key senators from both
parties and they were looking for a
path there.
So what happens? Clinton appoints
Hillary (not that i don't think she has
some good ideas) to work on it.
She botches it, first by excluding
people who had been working on
it for years.
When it failed it was clear no
Democrat could take it up again
for a generation.
They still haven't.
Taxation during those years
was a big point of the debate also.
As it always has been and will be.
So what happens under Clinton?
A huge shift of the tax burden onto
the working class, or labor, and
a lowering of taxes on income from
capital.
It was Democratic Party over.
It's why we're where we're at.
Fascism was so predictable.
And the corruption we're seeing.
Trump just happened to be the guy
to stumble into it.
How did FDR a champion of the working class? By focusing on populist financial issues and the common man being taken advantage of by the powers that be.
No culture war BS. No DSA proclamations about Zionism. No open borders, abolish the police, and the rest of the "sounds great at the time" stuff that in reality, results in terrible outcomes.
When the "working class" thinks about the left, their first image is of some college student scolding older folks for not knowing all 9 pronouns. Not someone standing up for them against the oligarchs who are making billions off of their backs.
The Democrats should have wondered how they lost the working class decades ago.
And to Ronald Reagan, who -- like Trump -- had no affinity with the working class, but knew how to talk to them.
They are playing catch-up now.
Perhaps there is still something to learn from Clinton's and Obama's successful two-term presidencies.
I was more optimistic about the Dem Socialist resurgence before I actually went on the DSA website and read their platform. It turns out that the people on the Right calling DSA "commujists" are not that far off. There may be academic distinctions between communism and the DSA's platform, but they are lost on me. I don't think most people, working class or not, want the end of police and private property.
Agreed. Running on abolishing the police and private property are two very stupid positions to take with most Americans.
Not only stupid, but plainly wrong.
How many millions of people were murdered by the state in the USSR, China, and Cuba? All to stifle dissent from those unhappy with their terrible quality of life and lack of freedoms. All while the elites lived in luxury: oligarchy by another form. Who would want to emulate that? Capitalism, as flawed and in need of regulation as it is, is still the least-worst option.
- - - - -
One of the few progressive operatives who was willing to be more candid about the challenge in reaching working-class voters was pollster Adam Carlson.
- - - - -
"willing to be more candid" = agree with my take
Perhaps they need to attack their own party... At least somewhat. I mean a) a lot -- they're essentially trump, b) some -squishy version, c) a little but (shhh) it's all part of the plan my fellow Dems
Maybe "b" or "c" because if it's "a" Dems have lost these people for a long time.
If Democrats would stop talking about giving people free this and free that and not requiring them to earn it, they are going to keep losing. By earn it I mean you do not necessarily have to be an executive or professional but you cannot sit around on your butt all day and watch TV and expect someone else to pay for your laziness. I studied the labor movement in College, some of my own ancestors were one of the first labor organizers. They were proud of thier, they never offered FREE TO ANYONE. THEY ALWAYS SAID IF YOU ARE WILLING TO WORK THEN GET YOU SHOULD GET REWARDED. IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO WORK YOU DO NOT DESERVE ANYTHING. Now work is relative. You can take care of other worker's kids if that is what you can do. You can pack books if that is what you can do. But you cannot sit around all day and watch TV and eat popcorn.
"If the left is the working-people faction of the party but working people don’t vote for its candidates, then what really are they?"
The answer has been obvious for a while --> phonies.
The progressive far-left and the DSA (am I allowed to plug the Atlantic on here? Their article calling the DSA parasites is highly recommended) are a symptom of the elitism that has hijacked higher education. They are mostly college grads from elite or elite-adjacent schools steeped in the idea that they (no matter how young they might be) know everything because they graduated from these schools. They are usually quite high income, but are angry that their high incomes don't get them more in the expensive coastal cities in which they live (their version of "affordability"). They know what's good for the working class because their seminars on Marxism *being good actually* taught them everything they need to know about what the working class _should_ want. While themselves wanting all the creature comforts of high income capitalism, of course.
Yes, I am exaggerating. But not by as much as I wish I was.
Likewise their most important foreign policy position is hating on Israel (because that is what a struggling farmer in Iowa cares about the most -- Palestine!) and the best way to help with home ownership is to cancel student loans (which the majority of Americans don't have).
Medicare for All, which polls abysmally when explained to regular people, because that's the system we would want if designing one in a vacuum.
I have been a liberal forever. I'm not a former conservative like some on here (no shade, just respect) and I used to believe the leftists were allies in making the world a better place. It's become abundantly clear that actually, this legion of tankies is as much of a threat as MAGA; indeed some of them are as illiberal and as dismissive of democracy as the MAGA true believers. The ones that aren't are still going to hand the country to MAGA. They are not allies. They are opponents.
My response is in line with the Atlantic article -- these are "allies" we don't want, throw them out.
The founding fathers knew that populism is bad no matter what side claims it.
“It has been a pretty big lie people [have] told themselves on here [on X] that working class people are closet leftists…” They have been telling themselves that long before X came along, like maybe since Marx and Engles handed out their first pamphlets.
I come from a working-class background. When I ask my nonvoting conservative brother what he thinks of the Democrats, he says "They check boxes."
A few important notes:
- The modern working class is not defined by unions (we crushed most of those in the 80s). They're defined by education attainment.
- This group, because they do not have union protections, are deeply skeptical of any global engagement, very protectionist, nationalist and culturally reactionary.
- This means populist messaging is extremely effective. Trump's great adaptation was to say tariffs and "American jobs" a lot.
The real explainer is cultural issues, not just appearance. The Democratic Party is correct to support minorities (my biased coastal elite view), but ~40% of our electorate are down with a platform that is probably a huge non-starter for Democrats. History teaches us that cultural issues vastly outweigh economics. I wish this wasn't true, but there are countless examples in our 250 year history where people deliberately accept being "poorer" in order to be slightly higher in a hierarchy (which still hurts them). Social capital is more important than real capital or values (hooray humans).
The solution here is to do two things (my view, open to pushback):
1. The Jon Ossoff - tie everyday issues to the pain voters feel. Most of these voters view the rich guys like Trump or Musk as ideals they aspire to. They don't see these guys as part of a corrupt system, they think they can be them...if those darn bureaucrats go away. This is false, but perception = reality.
2. Everything is culture - winning over more apolitical aspects of culture is really important. You need to drive down negatives. The target here are the losses Dems had with latinos, asians, and a portion of young men.
Every Democratic must have a ready answer to the question, “How many sexes are there?” That will inevitably be posed in any debate.
While the other party talks about how many sexes there are, do you have trouble paying for healthcare or food? What is more important, how many sexes there are or how much money you have at the end of the month?
Read through my comment again. Cultural issues have often overridden economic concerns. This boils down to:
1) Some people will forsake sacred cows for practical benefits
2) Some people will forego practical benefits if their “station” in a societal hierarchy rises
Take the inverse: would we be willing to shove gay people into the closet if we got universal healthcare and a strong safety net for everyone? I don’t think so. Therein lies the impasse. One group wants to expand liberty, the other wishes to restrict it - but a lot of people enjoy restricting the liberty of others. Open democracies and liberalism are a positive aberration on human history. Most of the time, governments are repressive autocracies.
I think it's an indictment of American culture and character that we even give a crap about this when *waves hands* everything else is going on. That said, you're right. Womp womp.
It is not that complicated why WORKING CLASS VOTERS are dissatisfied with the Democratic party. The key term here is WORKING CLASS. THESE PEOPLE HAVE JOBS, THEY WORK FOR A LIVING. They do not live off welfare or other special benefits for people who do not seem interested in working for a living for whatever reason. My son has a disability but he still chooses to Work. It is not glamourous work, it is manual labor but he has the pride in himself not to be a burden on the government for everything. If that means engaging in manual labor so be it. His family is very proud of him and shows it. Maybe that is part of the problem, people are not emotionally rewarded for "working" for a living anymore. Everyone seems to be in it, to get the most that they can get with the LEAST EFFORT. My son is not that way and neither are his friends, but it seems like there are some people out there that want something for nothing. If they get something for nothing, then someone ELSE HAS TO PAY FOR IT. SOMEONE HAS TO PAY, AND If you do not pay, then someone else is going to have to pay in your place and that is not fair.
Every “socialist” and “leftist” I know are lazy, good for nothings who exist solely off their parents success often from things that soley are possible in a capitalist society. I work my ass off and I’m college educated, I’ve been on disability once when I fractured my collarbone. Right now I don’t have a permanent job, so I’m doing side work as much as I can to pay the bills. It’s not glorious, but I agree with your son, I don’t wanna be someone’s burden or have someone else pay my way so I can fuck off and travel. Most working class people are this way, at least all the ones I know. There should be a social safety net, but what these leftists propose is often over the top and again, who’s gonna pay for it?