I'm a grocery clerk. My fellow female Democrats include my co-workers and my hair stylist. We put up with our white nationalist male coworkers telling us they voted for Trump because he will restore the power of white men. Aren't y'all noble?
Woke means compassionate and open-minded. Why is that a bad thing?
Thank You. People tell me I'm politically inconsistent because I've always voted for Dems, yet voted for Trump last November. But I am politically consistent: I always vote for the party I think best represents the interests of the working class.
I don’t see the core members of the Democratic Party changing at all because their ideology is more akin to a religion than it is to a set of policy positions. They frequently resort to censorship, cancellation, and even violence when confronted with opposing viewpoints (which is by itself off-putting), but many of their political positions are themselves lacking in common sense and real world orientation. The fact that the press mindlessly supports even the most radical and nonsensical Democrat positions makes things even more galling. Add to that the schools trying to indoctrinate children with these bizarre beliefs and you have the makings of what I hope will be Democrat losses for a long time to come.
I would tend to agree with this. In lieu of reforming, I see the Dems doubling down, unable to free themselves from this straigtjacket of an ideology that they continue to cling to, and an inability to free themselves from the grips of the progressive left. I am normally not a pessimist, but maybe the party needs to crash and burn, and let's see what arises from the ashes. At least that is my two cents today.
I think Ruy has it half right. Yes, Democrats have lost the working class. But, more fundementally, they've lost the raison d'etre of the Democratic party. The Democratic party since the progressive movement in the early 20th century has advocated activist government, and in particular the robust exertion of power by the federal government and executive agencies, as the means to ensure broad-based economic prosperty, racial equality, and social justice. There is no doubt that the federal government over the past 100 years has contributed substantially toward promoting those goals. But more recently Democrats have used governmental power to regulate far beyond that needed to ensure de jure racial equality and to protect against some of the inequities caused by free markets. The regulatory power championed by Democrats, particularly over the past few decades, now reaches into virutally every aspect of American life. And the progressives within the Biden administration - from their Covid education and job mandates to their climate and social and environmental justice regulations - illustrated the danger of investing so much authority in the federal government. As Lord Acton said, power corrupts. So Americans, particularly the working class, not only distrust government, they now reject the idea of big, activist government. They now see the federal government as a net negative, a power center that poses a risk to their vision of personal and community happiness. For a political party whose primary reason for existence is to expand governmental influence throughout society, that's a death knell. If you push Democrats to explain how they intend to win back the working class, beyond slogans, the likely answer is (echoing Elizabeth Warren): "We have a plan for that."
**So Americans, particularly the working class, not only distrust government, they now reject the idea of big, activist government.**
I don't think this is correct. If it were, we would see a relative outperformance of libertarian members of the GOP vs its more statist, interventionist members--and what we see, instead, is the opposite. The GOP is almost entirely MAGA now, (anything else gets primaried and voted out) and MAGA places emphasis on an authoritarian, nationalist, strongman style of politics, mixed with interventionist economic protectionism. (tariffs and industrial policy) This is happening at the same time centrists are losing power in the Democratic party.
And we are seeing similar developments elsewhere, in the rise of 'soft fascist' movements in Hungary, Turkey, Poland, Russia and other countries. Libertarian non-intervention is not the central ethos of these movements; instead, they are defined by often quite intrusive state interventions made on behalf of a particular group, to suppress or punish another, and they incorporate local oligarchs into the state apparatus. Classical liberalism did not believe the state should subsidize client oligarchies or incorporate them into itself--that was one of the key things it explicitly *rejected*.
This does not signal a rejection of big, activist government, or an embrace of classical liberal politics; it signals a continued rejection of classical liberalism, combined with a revision of what citizens believe big, activist government should be used for, and what groups it should reward or punish.
There was an American Compass survey out about a year ago that showed a majority, including if I remember correctly, a majority of Republicans, who believe that the govt does have a role to play in creating economic opportunities. So I would differentiate b/w people's frustration with govt overreach and thought policing on social issues and govt's role in investing in infrastructure, incentivizing manufacturing, etc.
The question is what is the appropriate role of the federal government in "creating economic opportunities." Democrats today argue that the government should actively intervene in the economy to implement its political agenda. Take, for example, the Biden administration's efforts across the commercial and regulatory landscape to implement its "green economy" agenda. Progressive ideology even goes so far as advocating that the federal government establish and oversee a government-led and financed industrial policy. https://rooseveltinstitute.org/event/progressive-industrial-policy-2022-and-beyond/ . This represents a radical departure from classical liberal ideology. If you were to ask which party today hews more closely to classical liberal thought and ideas (on individual liberty, free speech, entrepreneurism and the free-market system, federalism, the appropriate role of the federal government), I think the answer would have to be the Republicans.
As long as Democrats continue to bifurcate the electorate by education, they will miss the point. The division isn't on educational grounds (that tells you very little), but on whether you 'do' things for a living or you push paper. Builders, engineers, doctors, welders, carpenters, truck drivers, farmers, mechanics, business people of large and small businesses, pilots, fisherman, loggers, cops, soldiers......are overwhelmingly conservatively orientated. Social workers, clerks, office managers, human resource types, computer clerks, artists, salespeople, and anyone on the government tit like academics and employees of the government.....are overwhelmingly democrats. Now ask yourself where these occupations predominate---in urban metropolises or small cities and towns. It doesn't take a college degree (which doesn't dispense intelligence, civility, reason, or wisdom), to figure this out. Confirmation is found on these political maps, especially those that break it down by county.
Very astute observation here. I haven't been able to nail it down like you just did, but this is it exactly. Example: let's just say my husband and I aren't in need of money but we certainly aren't part of some "educated" set. (I have a useless B.A. I've never used) We own a physical business and we got there because he worked in a physical job for 25 years, gaining expertise in that area. We are working-class voters. We always will be. We "idnetify" with our own people no matter the income or education.
I see very little signs that the Democratic Party is listening to this advice. I think it will take a disruptive leader to break through. Until this happens they won’t truly do this
Dems must change the way they speak to the working class, but more importantly , they must radically change, how they think about them. Most Americans do not look at 50 year old, married, Fly Over Country, father of 3, running his own small trucking business, as inferior to a 26 year old B average, Gender Studies grad, but most Dems do. The arrogance and lack of empathy, especially of the last 4 years, has been stunning.
Many college degrees are, now, literally jokes, earned with little factual knowledge or critical thinking. They are simply Progressive Paper, purchased with 6 figures in student loans, little effort and a lot of wasted time. Yet Dems still continue, to worship at their alter.
The complete lack of respect for those with skills developed, outside a college campus, is often attributed to youth or immaturity. What is the excuse, when an entire political party is unable to appreciate, the myriad of skills required, for the US function?
The scorn spills over into policy. It is not hard to find a Dem, who will freely admit, open borders were never viewed as a problem within the Dem party, because many Dems see migrants as interchangeable, with Americans lacking college degrees. Some Dems see them as preferable. They claim migrants are far less likely to be "racist" than Americans sporting "only" a high school education, and less likely to complain about substandard wages or politics. In short, the migrants know their place.
A lack of interaction with the working class is not the main Dem hurdle. Dems have a massive attitude problem, passed down to the Dem rank and file from arrogant leaders, expecting support, even as they stabbed their own working class voters in the back, repeatedly. Until Dems change their perspectives, drastically, Reps are set for a good run.
There is a lot of globalist theory embedded in that attitude. When they are not trying to eliminate humans, they regard them as interchangeable widgets
I think that train has left the station. There are CONTINUED steady new GOP voter registrations that we can measure in AZ, PA, NC, where the average is about 1,000 new Republicans per month. Both PA and NC will be red by early 2026 at the latest (Trump won 5/6 elections there when they were blue). But the implications are that the same shifts are occurring in states we cannot track because they don't register by party: GA, MI, WI.
What this suggests is that the GOP has already moved BEYOND the working class and is now re-attracting college grades (who, as a share of the electorate, have stagnated as college attendance has shrunk by more than 4% and continues to tail downward). You don't get these kinds of numbers by just attracting working people. (I will not use the Marxist word "class" as it is wrong, stupid, and ahistorical).
Consider: NC, which was D+175,000 when Trump won it, is down to D+32,000. PA which was D+1.1 MILLION when Trump won it in 2016 is now D+89,000. AZ, which was R+300,000 last election has added 38,000 more. What should really set off alarms is that the GOP net gained over 1000 in Pima Co, the bluest of blue.
VA is going to be a nightmare for Democrats in the next few elections. It will have the dual burden of replacing (by my estimate) 50,000 outmigrants of fed employees and an untold number of illegal aliens taken off the rolls by the state---which saw the DOJ lift Biden's block against removing them yesterday. Let's say for giggles that this amounts to another 20,000 off the D voter roll. Seth Keshel and I (Captain K's Corner) estimate that VA has a D registration advantage of about 100,000. After the twin tsunamis hit, VA may only be D+20,000 or so. That's a GOP win.
Nationally, meanwhile, the impact of millions of illegals (almost all Democrats) being removed from the rolls has not yet even been addressed by the DNC>
So there are major shifts in GOP gains among college age (especially the youth, who are HIGHLY favorable of President Trump) and of Democrat losses in registration that they have not addressed.
Great observation. One would assume at the moment, the trend will only continue, unless Trump self immolates.
It is very possible to be socially liberal, and yet look at the programs uncovered by DOGE, and be sickened by the waste. Few Americans, view those on the LGBTQ spectrum, as any more notable, then being Left handed, but that does not mean, they support tens of millions of their tax dollars, expended to promote it, in foreign lands. Likewise for DEI governance, whatever, that might entail. EV drivers seem unlikely to cheers millions for EV stations in South East Asia, when billions in US spending, has produced only a handful at home.
Which examples of " waste" trouble you ( Musk hasn't actually found any ). Maybe you mean paying him $8,000,000 daily to fire government employees who do important jobs? Or do you just hate the idea of feeding children in other countries?
Musk hasn't actually found any waste? You and I have very different definitions of waste. And also of important jobs. Then you throw in the classic irrelevance of starving children. I might, just might, engage in a serious debate if you would attempt to justify the USAID grants for DEI training, LGBTQ+ operas, transgender things, support for illegals, and other silly and damaging ideas that the American public has firmly rejected, let alone spending taxpayer dollars on such things in other countries. How about it? Have any arguments to support why the taxpayer should support these things?
Illegal immigrants can only vote in a very few municipal elections, none in federal. Immigrants take a long time to become citizens and when they do vote at depressed numbers. Their exit will have bearing on congressional districts which are assigned based on the number of any type of person.
I believe that Schweikart is referring to people whose registrations were illegal, because they were not citizens. I have no idea as to their number, but the DoJ action would have no effect on registration by actual citizens.
The next question is "Should the Democratic Party survive if they don't listen to the working class." Given the trajectory they are on, that is going to have to be faced as previously loyal voters defect or age out.
There is a religious Left of which the Episcopalians are a part as witness the recent incident at the National Cathedral. Most Democrats aren't atheists but they are highly secular, be they nominal members of some denominations or just unchurched.
One of our bishops reminded a fake Christian ( Donald) of the teachings of Jesus as recorded in the Beatitudes. It .was a sermon, not an " incident". I understand that many worship the false god Trump because he hurts the people they hate.
Oh brother. Your fake bishop might want to read the Bible (if she can find one): praise in public, confront in private, Matthew 18:15-20. Have fun sitting in those empty pews.
Well, I'm one of the ones that will age out as I don't believe that the "working class" has some unique path to truth such that all other views should be ignored, and, by the way, a lot of the working class voted for Harris but I guess only working class voters who voted for Trump count. Since Musk/Trump are so perfect, we may face the decision whether there is even a point in having an election in 2028 as neither of your perfect heroes can constitutionally run away. Seems like the constitution is a big ugly obstacle that should be dumped to please the "working class."
The other day I was thinking about how journalists and pundits try to figure out the working class. Many times I read about us in the editorials of the NYT. We are sliced and diced and looked at under microscopes, focus grouped and polled and looked at from a historical perspective.
Thinking about it I wondered why people don't simply ask their neighbors or friends, and then I realized people no longer live together, no longer socialize together.
Growing up, most worked the factory floor, but also an assistant principal, many teachers, the director of all the music departments of our school district, and an MD who commuted to the city. People knew each other. How many working class people are in the social circle of NYT op ed writers, probably close to zero.
It's not just the bachelor's degree, there's a gulf of income also, and of expectations.
I'm not knocking on Ruy the writer of this piece, he for sure gets it. So do others I run across once in a while, mostly Democrats alienated by our elitism, but also former Democrats. Don't forget, until recently JD Vance was a Democrat, Musk was an Obama supporter, and Trump a long time registered Democrat who contributed to one of Kamala Harris' campaigns
Here's hoping the cure isn't worse than the disease.
I think you hit the nail on the head with people not living around or socializing with others who are on the other side of the aisle politically.
In my area (Northern Virginia), most people just assume that you think/vote a certain way and have no problem espousing their opinions openly with people they don't know. It's kind of weird...
Wokesters control Democratic nominations for elective offices in most states even though wokesters are not a majority of Democratic voters in general elections. The wokesters punch far above their weight in Democratic primaries because they vote at much higher percentages than the Democratic normies. It's very unlikely this fact will change, so future elections should seem to greatly favor Republicans.
However, as always events will decide elections. If Trump is widely perceived to be a failed/destructive President, Democrats will win big in 2026 and 2028. If inflation surges again, bad for Trump and Republicans. Foreign policy calamities could damage Trump and Republicans. Most of all, a major economic downturn would guarantee big Democratic wins. And then the looming long-term problem: the relentless accumulation of debt with annual deficits around $2 trillion with no realistic proposal from either major party to deal with that issue.
Our political future is very much undecided; the crystal ball is hopelessly cloudy.
First, I consider Elaine Kamarck and Bill Galston to be friends and I’ve admired their criticism of the Democratic Party since their first,published one in the 1980s. And second, I’ve read their newest version and agree with it.
But there is a deep,problem with the liberal patriot right now and with the Democratic Party in general. I’ll put it as a question. Do we seriously believe that democracy in America is in real danger and do we seriously believe that President Teump is as close to the Manchurian candidate that may ever happen, and that Elon Musks rape pillage and p,under approach to the federal government is designed to wreck not improve the government. I do believe at the very least that democracy is in danger. Here and now
It seems to me thst The Liberal Patriot and most of the Party does not believe that. If you do believe it then it isn’t obvious that the correct approach is as the Liberal Patriot suggests to read every poll of “working class” voters and follow them to the letter. It just might be that you have to take an unprecedented step. ie state that democracy is in danger and act as though you believed it. If you don’t believe democracy is in danger then say it. I want to see The Libersl Patriots extended normality of what’s happening today
My own view is that the entire political class simply refused to believe over the last 9 years that it would ever be possible for democracy in America to die. So the entire political class spent 9:years resolutely focusing on anything but that. As a leading marker, the New York Times announced last June that democracy was solely a Biden political issue and they would no longer consider it
My own view is that because of this blindness the odds are very high that American democracy is now permanent weakened and we have entered an authoritarian era. In this situation, it strikes me that it is more important to tell the truth than follow slavishly some set of polls.
Democracy is not dead or dying, it is undergoing a rejuvenation and is healthier now than it was under Biden or Obama, for sure, who were really trying to pervert the system to perpetuate eternal rule by the Democrat party, ensured by government censorship of dissent and rigged elections. The "censorship-industrial complex" has been exposed, at least in part, and is being dismantled, and hopefully the government money flow that has been going covertly to NGO's who are pushing deeply damaging agendas behind the scenes will be shut off. What is going on now is a very necessary cleaning out of corruption that has accumulated in the Swamp over decades without proper oversight of the sprawling administrative state. The Dems like it that way because, as we have seen, they siphon off billions in untraceable and unaccountable money for their own pet schemes at the expense of the rest of us.
The Dems define "democracy" as their version of the Swamp running everything to benefit them. They scream about "democracy dying" when the Swamp is threatened, because it threatens them. Like everything else about Progressives, reality is the complete inversion of what they say. It can be disorienting, truly "through the looking glass", but a useful rule of thumb is to listen to a Prog talking point, think about what the exact opposite of their point is, and you are probably fairly close to actual truth.
I dunno. I voted for Trump 3 times, but i'm pretty sure the days of actually selecting candidates are over. I suspect something analogous to Augustus is happening now. He realized that a veiled monarchy was the only way he was going to avoid endless civil wars, assassination attempts, etc. I think that's about where we are now. If the current administration lets the toxic Left have control back, the whole process - a mock civil war - will start over again. The surrender of the Left at this point was an attempt to avoid what they felt was coming, more or less a purge. Those who feel an authoritarian tinge to the world right now are not wrong, but to avoid this, the excesses of 2016 and 2020 would have to have been walked back. It's too late now. I feel like the res publica of the US ultimately failed because of a variety of factors, but I won't be around to read the obit.
I'm not entirely mournful about this, as I said, I think the system failed and things went wrong pretty much as soon as the republic was instantiated, certainly by 1800. The issues snowballed until we hit our first true authoritarian moments in the 20th century, first under Wilson and then under FDR. But the reasons why i'll leave to others to discuss once they come to the same realization. I can't possibly do them justice.
Mr. Teixeira, you should understand that the leadership of the Democratic Party, in thrall to the party's Progressives, would apply the WWTWCD? test in Costanza Mode: they would ask what the working class would do, and then do the opposite. This is because they regard the working class as the retrograde lumpenproletariat who are too stupid and brainwashed to know what's good for them, and because the leaders have supreme faith that their views of Socialism Done Right is the correct basis for organizing an economy. The way to get the working class to vote Democrat, they believe, is to shame and reeducate the working class to awaken it to class consciousness and the need for intersectional struggle (where being misgendered is as deep a hurt as being unable to earn enough food to feed one's family).
Or are you under the misapprehension that the Democratic Party really still is the party of the working person? It's the party that assumes that ownership of the votes of the working class belong to it by birthright, and that means it no longer has to care what the working class sees as its own interests. To the extent that they recognize that working class voters aren't giving their votes to Democrats anymore, they see that as proof that the working class needs not to be listened to but to be told what to think and what's best for them.
Case in point: Rep. Jasmine Crockett doesn't think the Democratic Party needs more moderate policies, it needs less ignorant voters. The problem, according to her, is that the working class is dumber than a box of rocks.
"Co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin asked Crockett for her response to President Donald Trump's approval rating and said, '70% believe that he’s fulfilling his promises,' appearing to reference a CBS/YouGov Poll, published on Feb. 9. The co-host also said that 45% of Americans think Democrats should be more moderate.
"'My takeaway is just like the election, we've got to do better at education. People don’t understand, but you will understand when those hospitals in rural America start closing down even more. You will understand when you don’t have your Social Security. You will understand when your Medicaid, your Medicare goes away. You will understand as planes continue to fall out of the sky,' she responded."
Perhaps the simple question for Democrats is "Is Trump destroying Democracy as we know it?" and if so "what are we going to do about it?"
I personally think he is destroying Democracy and the checks and balances our system was meant to have.
Unfortunately for Democrats if they really think Democracy is dying (like Biden and Harris said) they aren't doing much about it other than posting on social media from Martha Vineyard fundraisers.
I see them, democrats see them, voters see them. They are not serious leaders.
I want Democrats to fight as hard for us as Trump fights for maga. Right now they aren't.
Reading your own post will tell you the answer to your question. No one ever believed the “threat to democracy” stuff. It was all demagoguery to scare people into voting for them, because they had absolutely nothing else to run on.
What would the working class say right now about making peace in Ukraine? Should we stop sending billions over there? In a war that cannot be won unless it escalates into a world war with US troops on the ground?
That is either/or thinking. I would rather send billions to have another country fight Russia because there is no stopping Russia....there never has been. Chamberlain capitulated to the Nazis.
Russia has been our enemy since I was a child (in the 50s). They are not going to go to war with us because we're now being nice to them?
It's young men who will die. Probably more Trump voters' sons. I don't want that. We have to stand up to Russia there, or lose to Russia there and start a series of losses.
Chamberlin is brought up often, but we live in different times. Hitler had the military ability to roll through Europe. Putin does not, and he knows it. The man is evil, not stupid.
For 3 years, the Russians have been unable to beat the poor farmers next door, 1/3 their size and 1/10th as wealthy. Putin wouldn't last a week against NATO forces, much larger, better equipped with superior tech and funding. 1 million more people do not need to be maimed or dead, to stop Putin from rolling into the Baltics. Self preservation will do that.
Finally , as the mother of a draft age son, the whole "send a blank check, allow the fighting to continue forever, or we will take your kids" argument is unpersuasive. Zelensky tried it on Meet the Press.
The Soviets are gone. The Ukrainians are as much the heirs of the Soviets as the Russians are. The Russians were traditionally friends of the US. See Civil War international politics. Even after the Bolshevik revolution, the Soviets were off and on friends or at least trading partners. Then in WW2, they were allies that did the heavy lifting, in terms of blood, to destroy the Nazis. From 1945 to 1989, they were adversaries though we never fought them directly and signed many agreements with them to try to make the world safer( e.g. SALT). After 1991 and the collapse of the Soviet Union, they were more or less friendly. They stood aside in the first Iraq war and used their influence in the Stans to help with the logistics for the Afghan war. It was only after the expansion of NATO to the East that the current hostility built up. The NATO attack on Serbia in the Kosovo war is an often forgotten incident but it is not forgotten by the Russians. It was an offensive war by NATO against a traditional Russian ally and it confirmed the long held Russian suspicion that NATO was a threat to them.
Courting the working class means attracting blue collar workers, who are mainly men.
Democrats are overwhelmingly over-educated woke women in email jobs, who have nothing but contempt for them.
Can the email women share the party with blue collar men? I don't see it.
I'm a grocery clerk. My fellow female Democrats include my co-workers and my hair stylist. We put up with our white nationalist male coworkers telling us they voted for Trump because he will restore the power of white men. Aren't y'all noble?
Woke means compassionate and open-minded. Why is that a bad thing?
Woke means open-minded?? I think the vast majority of people think it’s the opposite.
You captured the hostility of the Democrat party quite well.
It is like a MAGA caricature of the Democrats
I don't think it is a caricature. I think Karen represents the zeitgeist of the democrat party
Reread your post. The answer is there
Thank You. People tell me I'm politically inconsistent because I've always voted for Dems, yet voted for Trump last November. But I am politically consistent: I always vote for the party I think best represents the interests of the working class.
What were the things Trump pledged that most appealed to you as a working class voter?
I don’t see the core members of the Democratic Party changing at all because their ideology is more akin to a religion than it is to a set of policy positions. They frequently resort to censorship, cancellation, and even violence when confronted with opposing viewpoints (which is by itself off-putting), but many of their political positions are themselves lacking in common sense and real world orientation. The fact that the press mindlessly supports even the most radical and nonsensical Democrat positions makes things even more galling. Add to that the schools trying to indoctrinate children with these bizarre beliefs and you have the makings of what I hope will be Democrat losses for a long time to come.
I would tend to agree with this. In lieu of reforming, I see the Dems doubling down, unable to free themselves from this straigtjacket of an ideology that they continue to cling to, and an inability to free themselves from the grips of the progressive left. I am normally not a pessimist, but maybe the party needs to crash and burn, and let's see what arises from the ashes. At least that is my two cents today.
I think Ruy has it half right. Yes, Democrats have lost the working class. But, more fundementally, they've lost the raison d'etre of the Democratic party. The Democratic party since the progressive movement in the early 20th century has advocated activist government, and in particular the robust exertion of power by the federal government and executive agencies, as the means to ensure broad-based economic prosperty, racial equality, and social justice. There is no doubt that the federal government over the past 100 years has contributed substantially toward promoting those goals. But more recently Democrats have used governmental power to regulate far beyond that needed to ensure de jure racial equality and to protect against some of the inequities caused by free markets. The regulatory power championed by Democrats, particularly over the past few decades, now reaches into virutally every aspect of American life. And the progressives within the Biden administration - from their Covid education and job mandates to their climate and social and environmental justice regulations - illustrated the danger of investing so much authority in the federal government. As Lord Acton said, power corrupts. So Americans, particularly the working class, not only distrust government, they now reject the idea of big, activist government. They now see the federal government as a net negative, a power center that poses a risk to their vision of personal and community happiness. For a political party whose primary reason for existence is to expand governmental influence throughout society, that's a death knell. If you push Democrats to explain how they intend to win back the working class, beyond slogans, the likely answer is (echoing Elizabeth Warren): "We have a plan for that."
**So Americans, particularly the working class, not only distrust government, they now reject the idea of big, activist government.**
I don't think this is correct. If it were, we would see a relative outperformance of libertarian members of the GOP vs its more statist, interventionist members--and what we see, instead, is the opposite. The GOP is almost entirely MAGA now, (anything else gets primaried and voted out) and MAGA places emphasis on an authoritarian, nationalist, strongman style of politics, mixed with interventionist economic protectionism. (tariffs and industrial policy) This is happening at the same time centrists are losing power in the Democratic party.
And we are seeing similar developments elsewhere, in the rise of 'soft fascist' movements in Hungary, Turkey, Poland, Russia and other countries. Libertarian non-intervention is not the central ethos of these movements; instead, they are defined by often quite intrusive state interventions made on behalf of a particular group, to suppress or punish another, and they incorporate local oligarchs into the state apparatus. Classical liberalism did not believe the state should subsidize client oligarchies or incorporate them into itself--that was one of the key things it explicitly *rejected*.
This does not signal a rejection of big, activist government, or an embrace of classical liberal politics; it signals a continued rejection of classical liberalism, combined with a revision of what citizens believe big, activist government should be used for, and what groups it should reward or punish.
There was an American Compass survey out about a year ago that showed a majority, including if I remember correctly, a majority of Republicans, who believe that the govt does have a role to play in creating economic opportunities. So I would differentiate b/w people's frustration with govt overreach and thought policing on social issues and govt's role in investing in infrastructure, incentivizing manufacturing, etc.
The question is what is the appropriate role of the federal government in "creating economic opportunities." Democrats today argue that the government should actively intervene in the economy to implement its political agenda. Take, for example, the Biden administration's efforts across the commercial and regulatory landscape to implement its "green economy" agenda. Progressive ideology even goes so far as advocating that the federal government establish and oversee a government-led and financed industrial policy. https://rooseveltinstitute.org/event/progressive-industrial-policy-2022-and-beyond/ . This represents a radical departure from classical liberal ideology. If you were to ask which party today hews more closely to classical liberal thought and ideas (on individual liberty, free speech, entrepreneurism and the free-market system, federalism, the appropriate role of the federal government), I think the answer would have to be the Republicans.
Great summary
Please write this as often as you can. It summarizes the situation perfectly. Thank you.
As long as Democrats continue to bifurcate the electorate by education, they will miss the point. The division isn't on educational grounds (that tells you very little), but on whether you 'do' things for a living or you push paper. Builders, engineers, doctors, welders, carpenters, truck drivers, farmers, mechanics, business people of large and small businesses, pilots, fisherman, loggers, cops, soldiers......are overwhelmingly conservatively orientated. Social workers, clerks, office managers, human resource types, computer clerks, artists, salespeople, and anyone on the government tit like academics and employees of the government.....are overwhelmingly democrats. Now ask yourself where these occupations predominate---in urban metropolises or small cities and towns. It doesn't take a college degree (which doesn't dispense intelligence, civility, reason, or wisdom), to figure this out. Confirmation is found on these political maps, especially those that break it down by county.
Very astute observation here. I haven't been able to nail it down like you just did, but this is it exactly. Example: let's just say my husband and I aren't in need of money but we certainly aren't part of some "educated" set. (I have a useless B.A. I've never used) We own a physical business and we got there because he worked in a physical job for 25 years, gaining expertise in that area. We are working-class voters. We always will be. We "idnetify" with our own people no matter the income or education.
I see very little signs that the Democratic Party is listening to this advice. I think it will take a disruptive leader to break through. Until this happens they won’t truly do this
Dems must change the way they speak to the working class, but more importantly , they must radically change, how they think about them. Most Americans do not look at 50 year old, married, Fly Over Country, father of 3, running his own small trucking business, as inferior to a 26 year old B average, Gender Studies grad, but most Dems do. The arrogance and lack of empathy, especially of the last 4 years, has been stunning.
Many college degrees are, now, literally jokes, earned with little factual knowledge or critical thinking. They are simply Progressive Paper, purchased with 6 figures in student loans, little effort and a lot of wasted time. Yet Dems still continue, to worship at their alter.
The complete lack of respect for those with skills developed, outside a college campus, is often attributed to youth or immaturity. What is the excuse, when an entire political party is unable to appreciate, the myriad of skills required, for the US function?
The scorn spills over into policy. It is not hard to find a Dem, who will freely admit, open borders were never viewed as a problem within the Dem party, because many Dems see migrants as interchangeable, with Americans lacking college degrees. Some Dems see them as preferable. They claim migrants are far less likely to be "racist" than Americans sporting "only" a high school education, and less likely to complain about substandard wages or politics. In short, the migrants know their place.
A lack of interaction with the working class is not the main Dem hurdle. Dems have a massive attitude problem, passed down to the Dem rank and file from arrogant leaders, expecting support, even as they stabbed their own working class voters in the back, repeatedly. Until Dems change their perspectives, drastically, Reps are set for a good run.
There is a lot of globalist theory embedded in that attitude. When they are not trying to eliminate humans, they regard them as interchangeable widgets
I think that train has left the station. There are CONTINUED steady new GOP voter registrations that we can measure in AZ, PA, NC, where the average is about 1,000 new Republicans per month. Both PA and NC will be red by early 2026 at the latest (Trump won 5/6 elections there when they were blue). But the implications are that the same shifts are occurring in states we cannot track because they don't register by party: GA, MI, WI.
What this suggests is that the GOP has already moved BEYOND the working class and is now re-attracting college grades (who, as a share of the electorate, have stagnated as college attendance has shrunk by more than 4% and continues to tail downward). You don't get these kinds of numbers by just attracting working people. (I will not use the Marxist word "class" as it is wrong, stupid, and ahistorical).
Consider: NC, which was D+175,000 when Trump won it, is down to D+32,000. PA which was D+1.1 MILLION when Trump won it in 2016 is now D+89,000. AZ, which was R+300,000 last election has added 38,000 more. What should really set off alarms is that the GOP net gained over 1000 in Pima Co, the bluest of blue.
VA is going to be a nightmare for Democrats in the next few elections. It will have the dual burden of replacing (by my estimate) 50,000 outmigrants of fed employees and an untold number of illegal aliens taken off the rolls by the state---which saw the DOJ lift Biden's block against removing them yesterday. Let's say for giggles that this amounts to another 20,000 off the D voter roll. Seth Keshel and I (Captain K's Corner) estimate that VA has a D registration advantage of about 100,000. After the twin tsunamis hit, VA may only be D+20,000 or so. That's a GOP win.
Nationally, meanwhile, the impact of millions of illegals (almost all Democrats) being removed from the rolls has not yet even been addressed by the DNC>
So there are major shifts in GOP gains among college age (especially the youth, who are HIGHLY favorable of President Trump) and of Democrat losses in registration that they have not addressed.
Great observation. One would assume at the moment, the trend will only continue, unless Trump self immolates.
It is very possible to be socially liberal, and yet look at the programs uncovered by DOGE, and be sickened by the waste. Few Americans, view those on the LGBTQ spectrum, as any more notable, then being Left handed, but that does not mean, they support tens of millions of their tax dollars, expended to promote it, in foreign lands. Likewise for DEI governance, whatever, that might entail. EV drivers seem unlikely to cheers millions for EV stations in South East Asia, when billions in US spending, has produced only a handful at home.
Pendulums swing, and this one feels like 1980.
Which examples of " waste" trouble you ( Musk hasn't actually found any ). Maybe you mean paying him $8,000,000 daily to fire government employees who do important jobs? Or do you just hate the idea of feeding children in other countries?
Musk hasn't actually found any waste? You and I have very different definitions of waste. And also of important jobs. Then you throw in the classic irrelevance of starving children. I might, just might, engage in a serious debate if you would attempt to justify the USAID grants for DEI training, LGBTQ+ operas, transgender things, support for illegals, and other silly and damaging ideas that the American public has firmly rejected, let alone spending taxpayer dollars on such things in other countries. How about it? Have any arguments to support why the taxpayer should support these things?
Illegal immigrants can only vote in a very few municipal elections, none in federal. Immigrants take a long time to become citizens and when they do vote at depressed numbers. Their exit will have bearing on congressional districts which are assigned based on the number of any type of person.
I believe that Schweikart is referring to people whose registrations were illegal, because they were not citizens. I have no idea as to their number, but the DoJ action would have no effect on registration by actual citizens.
The next question is "Should the Democratic Party survive if they don't listen to the working class." Given the trajectory they are on, that is going to have to be faced as previously loyal voters defect or age out.
They remind me of the Episcopal church - going more and more left, while membership continues to age and shrink.
I am sure they would be horrified to be compared to a church, even a left wing one.
Most Episcopalians are also Democrats and most Democrats are not atheists.
There is a religious Left of which the Episcopalians are a part as witness the recent incident at the National Cathedral. Most Democrats aren't atheists but they are highly secular, be they nominal members of some denominations or just unchurched.
One of our bishops reminded a fake Christian ( Donald) of the teachings of Jesus as recorded in the Beatitudes. It .was a sermon, not an " incident". I understand that many worship the false god Trump because he hurts the people they hate.
Oh brother. Your fake bishop might want to read the Bible (if she can find one): praise in public, confront in private, Matthew 18:15-20. Have fun sitting in those empty pews.
Compare the attitude towards Trump vs Henry VIII
Well, I'm one of the ones that will age out as I don't believe that the "working class" has some unique path to truth such that all other views should be ignored, and, by the way, a lot of the working class voted for Harris but I guess only working class voters who voted for Trump count. Since Musk/Trump are so perfect, we may face the decision whether there is even a point in having an election in 2028 as neither of your perfect heroes can constitutionally run away. Seems like the constitution is a big ugly obstacle that should be dumped to please the "working class."
What is the point of a party surviving if it has to give up all its principles to do so?
It gave up its principles years ago, which is Ruy's point.
The other day I was thinking about how journalists and pundits try to figure out the working class. Many times I read about us in the editorials of the NYT. We are sliced and diced and looked at under microscopes, focus grouped and polled and looked at from a historical perspective.
Thinking about it I wondered why people don't simply ask their neighbors or friends, and then I realized people no longer live together, no longer socialize together.
Growing up, most worked the factory floor, but also an assistant principal, many teachers, the director of all the music departments of our school district, and an MD who commuted to the city. People knew each other. How many working class people are in the social circle of NYT op ed writers, probably close to zero.
It's not just the bachelor's degree, there's a gulf of income also, and of expectations.
I'm not knocking on Ruy the writer of this piece, he for sure gets it. So do others I run across once in a while, mostly Democrats alienated by our elitism, but also former Democrats. Don't forget, until recently JD Vance was a Democrat, Musk was an Obama supporter, and Trump a long time registered Democrat who contributed to one of Kamala Harris' campaigns
Here's hoping the cure isn't worse than the disease.
I think you hit the nail on the head with people not living around or socializing with others who are on the other side of the aisle politically.
In my area (Northern Virginia), most people just assume that you think/vote a certain way and have no problem espousing their opinions openly with people they don't know. It's kind of weird...
Wokesters control Democratic nominations for elective offices in most states even though wokesters are not a majority of Democratic voters in general elections. The wokesters punch far above their weight in Democratic primaries because they vote at much higher percentages than the Democratic normies. It's very unlikely this fact will change, so future elections should seem to greatly favor Republicans.
However, as always events will decide elections. If Trump is widely perceived to be a failed/destructive President, Democrats will win big in 2026 and 2028. If inflation surges again, bad for Trump and Republicans. Foreign policy calamities could damage Trump and Republicans. Most of all, a major economic downturn would guarantee big Democratic wins. And then the looming long-term problem: the relentless accumulation of debt with annual deficits around $2 trillion with no realistic proposal from either major party to deal with that issue.
Our political future is very much undecided; the crystal ball is hopelessly cloudy.
Events, dear boy events.
Harold McMillian.
First, I consider Elaine Kamarck and Bill Galston to be friends and I’ve admired their criticism of the Democratic Party since their first,published one in the 1980s. And second, I’ve read their newest version and agree with it.
But there is a deep,problem with the liberal patriot right now and with the Democratic Party in general. I’ll put it as a question. Do we seriously believe that democracy in America is in real danger and do we seriously believe that President Teump is as close to the Manchurian candidate that may ever happen, and that Elon Musks rape pillage and p,under approach to the federal government is designed to wreck not improve the government. I do believe at the very least that democracy is in danger. Here and now
It seems to me thst The Liberal Patriot and most of the Party does not believe that. If you do believe it then it isn’t obvious that the correct approach is as the Liberal Patriot suggests to read every poll of “working class” voters and follow them to the letter. It just might be that you have to take an unprecedented step. ie state that democracy is in danger and act as though you believed it. If you don’t believe democracy is in danger then say it. I want to see The Libersl Patriots extended normality of what’s happening today
My own view is that the entire political class simply refused to believe over the last 9 years that it would ever be possible for democracy in America to die. So the entire political class spent 9:years resolutely focusing on anything but that. As a leading marker, the New York Times announced last June that democracy was solely a Biden political issue and they would no longer consider it
My own view is that because of this blindness the odds are very high that American democracy is now permanent weakened and we have entered an authoritarian era. In this situation, it strikes me that it is more important to tell the truth than follow slavishly some set of polls.
Democracy is not dead or dying, it is undergoing a rejuvenation and is healthier now than it was under Biden or Obama, for sure, who were really trying to pervert the system to perpetuate eternal rule by the Democrat party, ensured by government censorship of dissent and rigged elections. The "censorship-industrial complex" has been exposed, at least in part, and is being dismantled, and hopefully the government money flow that has been going covertly to NGO's who are pushing deeply damaging agendas behind the scenes will be shut off. What is going on now is a very necessary cleaning out of corruption that has accumulated in the Swamp over decades without proper oversight of the sprawling administrative state. The Dems like it that way because, as we have seen, they siphon off billions in untraceable and unaccountable money for their own pet schemes at the expense of the rest of us.
The Dems define "democracy" as their version of the Swamp running everything to benefit them. They scream about "democracy dying" when the Swamp is threatened, because it threatens them. Like everything else about Progressives, reality is the complete inversion of what they say. It can be disorienting, truly "through the looking glass", but a useful rule of thumb is to listen to a Prog talking point, think about what the exact opposite of their point is, and you are probably fairly close to actual truth.
I dunno. I voted for Trump 3 times, but i'm pretty sure the days of actually selecting candidates are over. I suspect something analogous to Augustus is happening now. He realized that a veiled monarchy was the only way he was going to avoid endless civil wars, assassination attempts, etc. I think that's about where we are now. If the current administration lets the toxic Left have control back, the whole process - a mock civil war - will start over again. The surrender of the Left at this point was an attempt to avoid what they felt was coming, more or less a purge. Those who feel an authoritarian tinge to the world right now are not wrong, but to avoid this, the excesses of 2016 and 2020 would have to have been walked back. It's too late now. I feel like the res publica of the US ultimately failed because of a variety of factors, but I won't be around to read the obit.
I'm not entirely mournful about this, as I said, I think the system failed and things went wrong pretty much as soon as the republic was instantiated, certainly by 1800. The issues snowballed until we hit our first true authoritarian moments in the 20th century, first under Wilson and then under FDR. But the reasons why i'll leave to others to discuss once they come to the same realization. I can't possibly do them justice.
How and why is democracy in danger? Please explain.
Mr. Teixeira, you should understand that the leadership of the Democratic Party, in thrall to the party's Progressives, would apply the WWTWCD? test in Costanza Mode: they would ask what the working class would do, and then do the opposite. This is because they regard the working class as the retrograde lumpenproletariat who are too stupid and brainwashed to know what's good for them, and because the leaders have supreme faith that their views of Socialism Done Right is the correct basis for organizing an economy. The way to get the working class to vote Democrat, they believe, is to shame and reeducate the working class to awaken it to class consciousness and the need for intersectional struggle (where being misgendered is as deep a hurt as being unable to earn enough food to feed one's family).
Or are you under the misapprehension that the Democratic Party really still is the party of the working person? It's the party that assumes that ownership of the votes of the working class belong to it by birthright, and that means it no longer has to care what the working class sees as its own interests. To the extent that they recognize that working class voters aren't giving their votes to Democrats anymore, they see that as proof that the working class needs not to be listened to but to be told what to think and what's best for them.
Case in point: Rep. Jasmine Crockett doesn't think the Democratic Party needs more moderate policies, it needs less ignorant voters. The problem, according to her, is that the working class is dumber than a box of rocks.
"Co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin asked Crockett for her response to President Donald Trump's approval rating and said, '70% believe that he’s fulfilling his promises,' appearing to reference a CBS/YouGov Poll, published on Feb. 9. The co-host also said that 45% of Americans think Democrats should be more moderate.
"'My takeaway is just like the election, we've got to do better at education. People don’t understand, but you will understand when those hospitals in rural America start closing down even more. You will understand when you don’t have your Social Security. You will understand when your Medicaid, your Medicare goes away. You will understand as planes continue to fall out of the sky,' she responded."
Perhaps the simple question for Democrats is "Is Trump destroying Democracy as we know it?" and if so "what are we going to do about it?"
I personally think he is destroying Democracy and the checks and balances our system was meant to have.
Unfortunately for Democrats if they really think Democracy is dying (like Biden and Harris said) they aren't doing much about it other than posting on social media from Martha Vineyard fundraisers.
I see them, democrats see them, voters see them. They are not serious leaders.
I want Democrats to fight as hard for us as Trump fights for maga. Right now they aren't.
Reading your own post will tell you the answer to your question. No one ever believed the “threat to democracy” stuff. It was all demagoguery to scare people into voting for them, because they had absolutely nothing else to run on.
They cried wolf for too long and now there's a wolf in the white house.
Great article- thank you
What would the working class say right now about making peace in Ukraine? Should we stop sending billions over there? In a war that cannot be won unless it escalates into a world war with US troops on the ground?
That is either/or thinking. I would rather send billions to have another country fight Russia because there is no stopping Russia....there never has been. Chamberlain capitulated to the Nazis.
Russia has been our enemy since I was a child (in the 50s). They are not going to go to war with us because we're now being nice to them?
It's young men who will die. Probably more Trump voters' sons. I don't want that. We have to stand up to Russia there, or lose to Russia there and start a series of losses.
Chamberlin is brought up often, but we live in different times. Hitler had the military ability to roll through Europe. Putin does not, and he knows it. The man is evil, not stupid.
For 3 years, the Russians have been unable to beat the poor farmers next door, 1/3 their size and 1/10th as wealthy. Putin wouldn't last a week against NATO forces, much larger, better equipped with superior tech and funding. 1 million more people do not need to be maimed or dead, to stop Putin from rolling into the Baltics. Self preservation will do that.
Finally , as the mother of a draft age son, the whole "send a blank check, allow the fighting to continue forever, or we will take your kids" argument is unpersuasive. Zelensky tried it on Meet the Press.
We have two draft-eligible grandsons, so that's not a trump card to use on us.
You vastly underestimate Russia....to your peril and to your son's peril.
Trump has shown the world that the US is weak, so it has to give in to its decades-long enemny. That is how to get defeated.
The Soviets are gone. The Ukrainians are as much the heirs of the Soviets as the Russians are. The Russians were traditionally friends of the US. See Civil War international politics. Even after the Bolshevik revolution, the Soviets were off and on friends or at least trading partners. Then in WW2, they were allies that did the heavy lifting, in terms of blood, to destroy the Nazis. From 1945 to 1989, they were adversaries though we never fought them directly and signed many agreements with them to try to make the world safer( e.g. SALT). After 1991 and the collapse of the Soviet Union, they were more or less friendly. They stood aside in the first Iraq war and used their influence in the Stans to help with the logistics for the Afghan war. It was only after the expansion of NATO to the East that the current hostility built up. The NATO attack on Serbia in the Kosovo war is an often forgotten incident but it is not forgotten by the Russians. It was an offensive war by NATO against a traditional Russian ally and it confirmed the long held Russian suspicion that NATO was a threat to them.
You must not have done atom bomb drills in your school.
This analysis of yours is very one-sided.
I most certainly did. And as an adult I devoted a great deal of effort in studying MAD. My point is, that is the past and not even all of the past.