Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party: Farmers, truck drivers, railroad workers --- the people I come from believed in the DFL and unions. I was the first in my family to earn a college degree thanks to the Pell Grant and other grants and loans brought to me by liberal policies. Do you know how poor you had to be in the 80s to qualify? I do. I also know that I get lumped in with college-educated suburban white women voters, which doesn't reflect the fact that I spend half of my life on a Native reservation and am definitely not well-to-do. So STOP! Stop talking about voters in categories. Stop winning groups of voters and start winning human beings! I for one would like to see someone who sees all voters as human beings with essential needs. Someone who is planning for the obstacles we all face. A UNIFIER who can speak to the big tent. Because winning voters by focusing on what divides us does not seem to be working.
Dan, I very much agree with the anti-corruption proposals. Additionally, I'd like to see Dems strongly push a broad mantra to "rebuild our middle class." Every proposal should mention this aim. Start with tax code overhaul. Simplify it and make it transparent, and more fair! Orient the tax code to more favor true work (goods or services) vs. passive investment income and so many loopholes that benefit the already wealthy. Propose further tax benefits for community service workers, eg, public school teachers, police and fire. Not only could this approach be good policy, but also politically potent.
You are spot on. But I fear tax changes like this wouldn’t even pass a Dem controlled Congress because far too many Dems are in thrall to the tax ideas pushed by corporations and the wealthy
Please can I ask a question, as one of your UK subscribers, why is it a bad idea for Democrats to elect a leader after the election, not wait until close to the next elections? In the UK we elect immediately and have a Leader of the Opposition who then is the focal point for all opposition and has time to formulate policy. I know you all push back when that is suggested, but why as so much criticism of the Democrats is about lack of leadership. and Trump as the de facto leader of the Republicans even before a Primary meant voters knew who to look to. thanks
If I understand where you are coming from, this has to with America not having a parliamentary system. The president is not a member of either legislative house; he’s elected separately.
Elections for leadership are held for each new Congress, but only within each house of Congress. Typically, the party out of power does not change its leadership, though. If you ask me, Democratic leadership across the board should have fallen on their swords after the 2024 election, but that’s a different story.
During the campaign, Harris donor and Linkedin founder Reid Hoffman called for Lina Khan ro be fired, because, he said, she was making war on business. Harris was silent. This was very bad. She had been handed an opportunity for a "Sistah Souljah" moment, in which a Democratic candidate calls out a democratic constituency suspect in the eyes of the wider public, in this case the very corporate elite the wider public now fears and loathes, to the point they celebrate their murders (yes, I'm referring to Saint Luigi).
This is emblematic of the problem you identify. I'd add that the people whose votes we need need an enemy, it's a psychological imperative for them. How to give them that, ie, "Eat the Rich", without panicking the horses in the suburbs will be tricky, but less tricky than Biden found it, I suspect, once Trump and his billionaires crash the economy.
The current head of the DNC, whose name I can't be bothered to remember, remarked there were good and bad billionaires. Very, very, bad. The point is, we have no way to control, to protect ourselves from, the bad ones. And they are, inevitably, mostly bad. Brandeis was right, we can have concentrated private wealth and power, or we can have democracy - which we are now watching dying before our eyes.
Great analysis. I forgot about Hoffman telling Harris to fire Khan. I remember being disgusted in the moment when Harris said nothing. But at that point her corporate lawyer brother in law Tony West had seized control of her messaging and her brief foray into populism died. Sympathizers at the time said Harris did the best she could with the bad hand Biden dealt her but her extreme caution and unwillingness to break with Biden, even a little, cost her the election
Actually, I view her muddying the economic populism message AS "breaking with Biden". The most fiercely populist night of the convention was the first, the night Biden spoke. It was corporate media that trashed and toxicified Biden, that muffled his message, buried his successes, and corporate Democrats seemed fine with it. Remember who stuck with Biden. Bernia and AOC, not Nancy Pelosi!
You're correct Biden governed like a populist But he was such a poor communicator that nobody knew it and he didn't get credit for it. By break with Biden, I mean separate because he was so unpopular. But the only thing that was happening, which I learned from Tapper's book, is that Biden was pressuring her to stay the course, using "no daylight" as his stick to keep Kamala in line. Biden accomplished much But he and his advisors kept the truth of his infirmity from America until it was too late to pursue any course other than passing the baton to Kamala
Dems don’t even have to be particularly pro-union. They just have to be pro-all the things that unions do to make the lives of their members better. They have to remind people of why unions were formed and exist in the first place. To be the collective voice for the traditionally voiceless. In fact, if Dems just embrace this concept themselves, that they too, are the voice for those who have never had one and for those who feel as if they’ve lost their voice (and here voice=power) and if they apply that mission to everything they do, they will (hopefully)start making choices that feel better for their voters and also, maybe find a little courage of their convictions (looking at you, Schumer, Pelosi, and Jeffries. Oh and every Dem operative who helped tank Kamala’s campaign by making it milquetoast)
This is a great outline for a strong offense. But, I worry that it ignores the need for a strong defense when the Republicans and the right wing media machine will inevitably turn the conversation to all of the "controversial" issues - medicare for all, LGBTQ rights, racial justice, immigration, etc. Dems either try to get very technical in their responses (actually immigration is a civil offense, not a criminal offense) or they are so afraid of saying the wrong thing, they end up saying nothing. Pete's response to the late term abortion question brought it to a very human level that I think really helped blunt that attack. Andy Beshear doesn't shy away from LGBTQ rights. He brings it back to his faith and a very core fundamental belief. But, they are the exception. Elissa Slotkin I think just says ignore all that stuff. Newsom throws trans people under the bus. We absolutely need a strong offense but it has to go hand in hand with a strong defense. But the only thing I hear from anyone in leadership is focus on economics and ignore everything else.
This “everything that doesn’t focus on the economy is a distraction” crap that far too many Dems push ignores the fact that Republicans have consistently won on cultural issue. Time for the Dems to reframe the issues they are too scared to run on. Time for Dems to be less scared overall
Keep pounding this message home Dan. Maybe some of the feckless Dems in Congress will listen. More importantly, these positions appear to be bubbling up from the grassroots. Dems have just won a state race in Iowa by 11 points in a district Trump won by 10
Probably best to start with talking like middle class people and not coded language. Big ideas are hard to come by, but something like no fed tax on people under 30 years old and make less than 100k. Keep it simple!
Now, Before the Midterms: There should be a massive effort to place a billboard on every major highway on the outskirts of every major town in every Red District in the Country identifying by name the U.S. Representative who voted for the Big Ugly Bill listing the eventual damages it will do to its citizens. The same should be done in every State with a Republican Senator up for reelection. Much of the bad stuff will not be apparent to voters until after the midterms; consequently, Democratic Party messaging between now and then is critical! We need to be in Republican Faces Every Day like they are in ours.
For Example, " Your Representative in Congress, (first name, last name) Just Voted to slash Your Medicaid, Medicare, and SNAP Benefits to Pay for Tax Cuts for the Rich! VOTE HIM (HER) OUT."
Is that a slight overstatement of facts? Certainly, but that's what Republicans do all the time and we need to counterattack using the same tactics and be UBIQUITOUS about it, e.g., Billboards.
But I think it is a very big mistake to confuse Romney voters with Harris voters - there are some demographic similarities, but they are different people. That is, Romney voters did not switch to Harris except for a fairly small number of never-Trumpers who held their nose and pulled for Harris. I suspect part of what happened was just old country club Republicans dying and younger, more socially liberal college educated voters showing up. Most Romney voters held their noses and voted for Trump. Most Obama voters voted for Harris with varying degrees of enthusiasm. The percentages changed for other reasons, but Romney voters did not become Harris voters.
However, the shift in working class voters is real. Whole neigborhoods that Obama carried were carried by Trump by significant margins. I am not sure we understand why, but I think there is something to the "Strangers in Their Own Land" argument. If you are white and struggling and went to fairly crappy schools because your parents struggled after the Reagan revolution it may really frost you to hear about your alleged "White Privilege." It is not that the chunk of Trump voters we need really hate Chappell Roan - those folks are a lost cause. It is just that non-princess (or prince) cis-gender, heterosexual mid-westerners need to believe we also on their side. And if they don't have privilege in general, they cannot have white privilege. Today, too many people feel far from the concerns of the Democratic party, and that is not wholly the creation of Right media.
I am not a big Texiera fan; I think many of his specifics are wrong, or crabbed, or both, but he does make us think about majoritarian politics. We do not lead with "Good Schools for Everyone," or "Health Care Access for Everyone." We lead with "The Marginalized do not ..." But you do not have to be marginalized to be struggling in the U.S.A.
It is possible to support the civil rights of transgender people and still protect women’s sports, which is a new and fragile institution and does not need the controversy of who is eligible to compete. Please do not give the Republicans the “they them” weapon.
The Dems slogan ought to be "Make America Affordable Again." For me, the winning formula for Dems has 3 components. (1) Dan's earlier post about unity. (2) This post article about a message that resonates with what voters care about (costs, crime). And (3) a charismatic leader. So, the challenge is a unified party that consistently and effectively communicates a crisp message that resonates with voters delivered with authenticity by a charismatic leader. Tall order. Can they do it?
I would wish that NYC politics would not become an avatar for National Democratics. NYC has fairly unique problems that don't translate to the rest of the country. Our mass transit system is comprehensive but old. The subway has grown over the decades by patching 3 independent systems together. Our crowded neighborhoods make rents & thus grocery store prices higher than they otherwise would be. Even our park systems are generally kept up by independent foundations rather than direct city funds. School union systems can make it difficult to access independent social work projects.
Mamdani is a local politician who is actively and creatively addressing these and other issues by talking to everyday people all the time. This aspect of who he is & how he is functioning is what Democrats across the country can emulate. (Last weekend Mamdani organized an impromptu citywide scavenger hunt)l. Thousands, apparently, participated. He spoke to so many in this fun setting. It was fabulous! It got us out of our cloistered neighborhoods)
Imagine messages that turn the Republicans' "makers and takers" slur on it's head.
Visuals of farm workers, mechanics, pub owners, teachers, construction workers, nurses etc with a "We make America" message, contrasted with Trump and his oligarchs and yachts and gold toilets with "They take from America", followed with "Make America fair, for everyone".
Probably far too confrontational for today's Dem leadership, and it would piss off the donors, but hooboy, that would feel good and likely speak to a lot of voters.
"Donald Trump ran and won on two ideas: he would lower costs and take on a corrupt, broken political system that has failed the working class for far too long." What irony, what a joke. I don't see why Democrats, esp those running for office or in office, are not using this as the key message, you can write it all yourselves in one sentence. I would add that he won on a return to true, dominant patriarchy. I do believe we made some mistakes in some ways there, I was in grad school just prior and men were not called on, and women teachers literally said to us women: this is our time, and truly ignored male students who were on our side, trying to do good work. But still. What is happening is so ugly the messages all seem obvious to me.
Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party: Farmers, truck drivers, railroad workers --- the people I come from believed in the DFL and unions. I was the first in my family to earn a college degree thanks to the Pell Grant and other grants and loans brought to me by liberal policies. Do you know how poor you had to be in the 80s to qualify? I do. I also know that I get lumped in with college-educated suburban white women voters, which doesn't reflect the fact that I spend half of my life on a Native reservation and am definitely not well-to-do. So STOP! Stop talking about voters in categories. Stop winning groups of voters and start winning human beings! I for one would like to see someone who sees all voters as human beings with essential needs. Someone who is planning for the obstacles we all face. A UNIFIER who can speak to the big tent. Because winning voters by focusing on what divides us does not seem to be working.
Well said, fellow Pell grant recipient here.
I cannot claim to have ever lived in poverty, but I think you are right and I think you have framed it beautifully.
Dan, I very much agree with the anti-corruption proposals. Additionally, I'd like to see Dems strongly push a broad mantra to "rebuild our middle class." Every proposal should mention this aim. Start with tax code overhaul. Simplify it and make it transparent, and more fair! Orient the tax code to more favor true work (goods or services) vs. passive investment income and so many loopholes that benefit the already wealthy. Propose further tax benefits for community service workers, eg, public school teachers, police and fire. Not only could this approach be good policy, but also politically potent.
You are spot on. But I fear tax changes like this wouldn’t even pass a Dem controlled Congress because far too many Dems are in thrall to the tax ideas pushed by corporations and the wealthy
Community service workers should be paid more, not taxed less.
Please can I ask a question, as one of your UK subscribers, why is it a bad idea for Democrats to elect a leader after the election, not wait until close to the next elections? In the UK we elect immediately and have a Leader of the Opposition who then is the focal point for all opposition and has time to formulate policy. I know you all push back when that is suggested, but why as so much criticism of the Democrats is about lack of leadership. and Trump as the de facto leader of the Republicans even before a Primary meant voters knew who to look to. thanks
If I understand where you are coming from, this has to with America not having a parliamentary system. The president is not a member of either legislative house; he’s elected separately.
Elections for leadership are held for each new Congress, but only within each house of Congress. Typically, the party out of power does not change its leadership, though. If you ask me, Democratic leadership across the board should have fallen on their swords after the 2024 election, but that’s a different story.
During the campaign, Harris donor and Linkedin founder Reid Hoffman called for Lina Khan ro be fired, because, he said, she was making war on business. Harris was silent. This was very bad. She had been handed an opportunity for a "Sistah Souljah" moment, in which a Democratic candidate calls out a democratic constituency suspect in the eyes of the wider public, in this case the very corporate elite the wider public now fears and loathes, to the point they celebrate their murders (yes, I'm referring to Saint Luigi).
This is emblematic of the problem you identify. I'd add that the people whose votes we need need an enemy, it's a psychological imperative for them. How to give them that, ie, "Eat the Rich", without panicking the horses in the suburbs will be tricky, but less tricky than Biden found it, I suspect, once Trump and his billionaires crash the economy.
The current head of the DNC, whose name I can't be bothered to remember, remarked there were good and bad billionaires. Very, very, bad. The point is, we have no way to control, to protect ourselves from, the bad ones. And they are, inevitably, mostly bad. Brandeis was right, we can have concentrated private wealth and power, or we can have democracy - which we are now watching dying before our eyes.
Great analysis. I forgot about Hoffman telling Harris to fire Khan. I remember being disgusted in the moment when Harris said nothing. But at that point her corporate lawyer brother in law Tony West had seized control of her messaging and her brief foray into populism died. Sympathizers at the time said Harris did the best she could with the bad hand Biden dealt her but her extreme caution and unwillingness to break with Biden, even a little, cost her the election
Actually, I view her muddying the economic populism message AS "breaking with Biden". The most fiercely populist night of the convention was the first, the night Biden spoke. It was corporate media that trashed and toxicified Biden, that muffled his message, buried his successes, and corporate Democrats seemed fine with it. Remember who stuck with Biden. Bernia and AOC, not Nancy Pelosi!
You're correct Biden governed like a populist But he was such a poor communicator that nobody knew it and he didn't get credit for it. By break with Biden, I mean separate because he was so unpopular. But the only thing that was happening, which I learned from Tapper's book, is that Biden was pressuring her to stay the course, using "no daylight" as his stick to keep Kamala in line. Biden accomplished much But he and his advisors kept the truth of his infirmity from America until it was too late to pursue any course other than passing the baton to Kamala
"Brief Foray into populism...," that says it all.
Dems don’t even have to be particularly pro-union. They just have to be pro-all the things that unions do to make the lives of their members better. They have to remind people of why unions were formed and exist in the first place. To be the collective voice for the traditionally voiceless. In fact, if Dems just embrace this concept themselves, that they too, are the voice for those who have never had one and for those who feel as if they’ve lost their voice (and here voice=power) and if they apply that mission to everything they do, they will (hopefully)start making choices that feel better for their voters and also, maybe find a little courage of their convictions (looking at you, Schumer, Pelosi, and Jeffries. Oh and every Dem operative who helped tank Kamala’s campaign by making it milquetoast)
This is a great outline for a strong offense. But, I worry that it ignores the need for a strong defense when the Republicans and the right wing media machine will inevitably turn the conversation to all of the "controversial" issues - medicare for all, LGBTQ rights, racial justice, immigration, etc. Dems either try to get very technical in their responses (actually immigration is a civil offense, not a criminal offense) or they are so afraid of saying the wrong thing, they end up saying nothing. Pete's response to the late term abortion question brought it to a very human level that I think really helped blunt that attack. Andy Beshear doesn't shy away from LGBTQ rights. He brings it back to his faith and a very core fundamental belief. But, they are the exception. Elissa Slotkin I think just says ignore all that stuff. Newsom throws trans people under the bus. We absolutely need a strong offense but it has to go hand in hand with a strong defense. But the only thing I hear from anyone in leadership is focus on economics and ignore everything else.
This “everything that doesn’t focus on the economy is a distraction” crap that far too many Dems push ignores the fact that Republicans have consistently won on cultural issue. Time for the Dems to reframe the issues they are too scared to run on. Time for Dems to be less scared overall
Keep pounding this message home Dan. Maybe some of the feckless Dems in Congress will listen. More importantly, these positions appear to be bubbling up from the grassroots. Dems have just won a state race in Iowa by 11 points in a district Trump won by 10
Probably best to start with talking like middle class people and not coded language. Big ideas are hard to come by, but something like no fed tax on people under 30 years old and make less than 100k. Keep it simple!
Now, Before the Midterms: There should be a massive effort to place a billboard on every major highway on the outskirts of every major town in every Red District in the Country identifying by name the U.S. Representative who voted for the Big Ugly Bill listing the eventual damages it will do to its citizens. The same should be done in every State with a Republican Senator up for reelection. Much of the bad stuff will not be apparent to voters until after the midterms; consequently, Democratic Party messaging between now and then is critical! We need to be in Republican Faces Every Day like they are in ours.
For Example, " Your Representative in Congress, (first name, last name) Just Voted to slash Your Medicaid, Medicare, and SNAP Benefits to Pay for Tax Cuts for the Rich! VOTE HIM (HER) OUT."
Is that a slight overstatement of facts? Certainly, but that's what Republicans do all the time and we need to counterattack using the same tactics and be UBIQUITOUS about it, e.g., Billboards.
You and Ruy Texiera should talk to each other!
But I think it is a very big mistake to confuse Romney voters with Harris voters - there are some demographic similarities, but they are different people. That is, Romney voters did not switch to Harris except for a fairly small number of never-Trumpers who held their nose and pulled for Harris. I suspect part of what happened was just old country club Republicans dying and younger, more socially liberal college educated voters showing up. Most Romney voters held their noses and voted for Trump. Most Obama voters voted for Harris with varying degrees of enthusiasm. The percentages changed for other reasons, but Romney voters did not become Harris voters.
However, the shift in working class voters is real. Whole neigborhoods that Obama carried were carried by Trump by significant margins. I am not sure we understand why, but I think there is something to the "Strangers in Their Own Land" argument. If you are white and struggling and went to fairly crappy schools because your parents struggled after the Reagan revolution it may really frost you to hear about your alleged "White Privilege." It is not that the chunk of Trump voters we need really hate Chappell Roan - those folks are a lost cause. It is just that non-princess (or prince) cis-gender, heterosexual mid-westerners need to believe we also on their side. And if they don't have privilege in general, they cannot have white privilege. Today, too many people feel far from the concerns of the Democratic party, and that is not wholly the creation of Right media.
I am not a big Texiera fan; I think many of his specifics are wrong, or crabbed, or both, but he does make us think about majoritarian politics. We do not lead with "Good Schools for Everyone," or "Health Care Access for Everyone." We lead with "The Marginalized do not ..." But you do not have to be marginalized to be struggling in the U.S.A.
Excellent column, Dan! This is why I subscribe.
It is possible to support the civil rights of transgender people and still protect women’s sports, which is a new and fragile institution and does not need the controversy of who is eligible to compete. Please do not give the Republicans the “they them” weapon.
The Dems slogan ought to be "Make America Affordable Again." For me, the winning formula for Dems has 3 components. (1) Dan's earlier post about unity. (2) This post article about a message that resonates with what voters care about (costs, crime). And (3) a charismatic leader. So, the challenge is a unified party that consistently and effectively communicates a crisp message that resonates with voters delivered with authenticity by a charismatic leader. Tall order. Can they do it?
I would wish that NYC politics would not become an avatar for National Democratics. NYC has fairly unique problems that don't translate to the rest of the country. Our mass transit system is comprehensive but old. The subway has grown over the decades by patching 3 independent systems together. Our crowded neighborhoods make rents & thus grocery store prices higher than they otherwise would be. Even our park systems are generally kept up by independent foundations rather than direct city funds. School union systems can make it difficult to access independent social work projects.
Mamdani is a local politician who is actively and creatively addressing these and other issues by talking to everyday people all the time. This aspect of who he is & how he is functioning is what Democrats across the country can emulate. (Last weekend Mamdani organized an impromptu citywide scavenger hunt)l. Thousands, apparently, participated. He spoke to so many in this fun setting. It was fabulous! It got us out of our cloistered neighborhoods)
Imagine messages that turn the Republicans' "makers and takers" slur on it's head.
Visuals of farm workers, mechanics, pub owners, teachers, construction workers, nurses etc with a "We make America" message, contrasted with Trump and his oligarchs and yachts and gold toilets with "They take from America", followed with "Make America fair, for everyone".
Probably far too confrontational for today's Dem leadership, and it would piss off the donors, but hooboy, that would feel good and likely speak to a lot of voters.
"Donald Trump ran and won on two ideas: he would lower costs and take on a corrupt, broken political system that has failed the working class for far too long." What irony, what a joke. I don't see why Democrats, esp those running for office or in office, are not using this as the key message, you can write it all yourselves in one sentence. I would add that he won on a return to true, dominant patriarchy. I do believe we made some mistakes in some ways there, I was in grad school just prior and men were not called on, and women teachers literally said to us women: this is our time, and truly ignored male students who were on our side, trying to do good work. But still. What is happening is so ugly the messages all seem obvious to me.