There are so many good points in your post, also made by the likes of Ruy Teixeira and many others, but like the MAGA Republicans so often do, so many Democratic politicians can't help shooting themselves in the foot because they feel this urgent need to have to pander to the far left (some of whom are supposedly for the "working class or blue collar people", a misnomer that ignores a large portion of our population). BTW what is the net worth of Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi? Who travels by private plane, Bernie are you listening?
It's well past time for the Democratic party to stand with 70+ percent of Americans. As a former moderate Republican turned independent to escape MAGA, I have two suggestions.
1) There is a difference between being a Democrat and a far-left, Democratic-Socialist, or Socialist. For the Democratic party to stand with so many Americans, it needs to let a few percent on the furthest left find their own party. This will also free other liberal leaning folks to identify with the moderation of politics needed to successfully lead most Americans. And it allows the party to say it is not a bunch of radical left socialists as MAGA says it is.
I agree with everything you say in this article. And I have a lot of family and friends who voted for Trump the first time in 2024 (some of them family oriented, hardworking immigrants) for the exact reasons you point out. One family member who voted for Trump, is even vocally pro universal healthcare, but voted for him for all the reasons you mention.
In addition to abandoning far left positions, the party needs to learn to communicate with "low information voters" -- the people who understandably choose to invest most of their time -not- in the details of politics.
We've got to boil the messaging down to something brief, substantive, and persuasive. Right now: where are the summaries and 1 pagers that describe the terrible impact the current budget bill will have on the vast majority of Americans?
Not 10,000 words on all the details and rabbit holes. Something short, simple and powerful that the voters we need will read (or watch) and find persuasive?
I dont think this is too pedantic a complaint: in footnote 1 you mention "The Tea Party" in the context of the 1990's. The Tea Party didnt exist until the whole 2008-2009 Obama bailout. The 90's had other names, "Gingrichites" maybe, although I dont think there was a specific movement title beyond "conservative". (Although I agree the Tea Party movement was a close successor to the first.)
Those men are not coming back. People in rural America are not coming back. What the Democratic Party has become is extreme and pathetic and abhorrent. I’m a guy with an advanced degree, and I will never vote for a Democrat again. I’m just waiting for all the non-MAGA and non-TDS people to form a third party. But the established parties (especially the Dems) will always fight it tooth-and-nail.
Perhaps some common sense appeals would work for them, but then they would have to 180 on many of their positions, and what a horror it would be to lose the extreme left.
Dear Purple America, you are just kidding yourself if you think the current Democratic Party will bother to take your advice and become more sane. Not going to happen. President Trump and the Republican Party are now the party of the middle and working classes across all demographics. The Democrats can’t help themselves, they STILL have that sneering, insufferable, condescending stick up their asses attitude towards us ‘lessers’ in red flyover country. Have you seen the map of the 2024 election? It’s almost entirely red, except for the smattering of blue islands along the snotty West Coast and snobby Northeast. Latinos have pretty much ditched the Democrats. The reddest counties in the last election were not in Kansas, Oklahoma or West Virginia. Rather, they were along the Rio Grande in Texas, 80%-90% Hispanic. As for gay men and lesbians, we ‘normal gays’ are becoming more vocal and aggressive in wanting to ditch the TQIA+++ bullshit queer mob. My prediction: 60+ pickup of House seats next November for the Republicans and crossing the 60 Senate seats in the Senate; a landslide victory for JD Vance matching that of Richard Nixon in 1972 and Ronald Reagan in 1984. The sole state Tim Walz wins in 2028: Third time’s a charm Minnesota (1972, 1984, 2028). Why do I predict this with confidence? The Democrats simply will not change from the unhinged, leftist lunatics that they currently are.
I agree 100 percent with what you’re saying. But again, does it really matter?
Without doing anything, democrats are already predicted to win the house. Wont Trump fatigue do the rest in 2028? I don’t know (and again, I agree with you on the unique set of challenges Democrats face), but history shows that politics is cyclical.
Dems in Disarray has been germinating since 1964, when Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act (he told Bill Moyers “I think we may have lost the south for your lifetime – and mine.”
Add the counterculture, the Vietnam fiasco, George Wallace, and you get the electoral map that put Nixon in the White House in 1968; add “Democrats for Nixon” and McGovern and you get the blowout in 1972. A moderate Southern governor (Carter) was able to buck the tide, but as you say, it wasn’t until another such governor appeared (Clinton) that the tide was turned for a while. And the tide would have stayed turned were it not for the vagaries of the Electoral College and the Supreme Court that handed the Presidency to George W. Bush. Idem the Electoral College, which kept Hillary Clinton out of office (though tbh, she should never have run after losing the nomination in 2008). Trump’s popular vote win last Fall is a disturbing trend, but I’d also say is down to Disarray of a unique sort (Biden thinking he could defeat time and win a second term, a less-than-perfect candidate who had to take his place and win in 100 days). That said, Trump is uniquely unpopular and term-limited, so a Democratic reset should be possible).
For example, consider a moderate Democrat who is willing to run for the Senate in Texas: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/23/us/terry-virts-john-cornyn-senate-texas.html?unlocked_article_code=1.RU8.IagW.Co5JIaZEkYtH&smid=url-share
There are so many good points in your post, also made by the likes of Ruy Teixeira and many others, but like the MAGA Republicans so often do, so many Democratic politicians can't help shooting themselves in the foot because they feel this urgent need to have to pander to the far left (some of whom are supposedly for the "working class or blue collar people", a misnomer that ignores a large portion of our population). BTW what is the net worth of Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi? Who travels by private plane, Bernie are you listening?
It's well past time for the Democratic party to stand with 70+ percent of Americans. As a former moderate Republican turned independent to escape MAGA, I have two suggestions.
1) There is a difference between being a Democrat and a far-left, Democratic-Socialist, or Socialist. For the Democratic party to stand with so many Americans, it needs to let a few percent on the furthest left find their own party. This will also free other liberal leaning folks to identify with the moderation of politics needed to successfully lead most Americans. And it allows the party to say it is not a bunch of radical left socialists as MAGA says it is.
2) Whatever method is chosen (my example is https://www.npr.org/2021/11/09/1053929419/feel-like-you-dont-fit-in-either-political-party-heres-why#progressive), do the gruntwork to match with us along the political spectrum. This match is not far-left nor far-right. It is just right for most Americans.
Other than too much focus on the Presidency, this piece has so much going for it.
Competing in rural areas & red states
Giving latitude to candidates on issues
Focus on broad economic and quality of life issues that impact everyone
Supporting families including the traditional ones
I agree with everything you say in this article. And I have a lot of family and friends who voted for Trump the first time in 2024 (some of them family oriented, hardworking immigrants) for the exact reasons you point out. One family member who voted for Trump, is even vocally pro universal healthcare, but voted for him for all the reasons you mention.
My point being, I guess, that these people are persuadable to vote Democrat again if Democrats were to follow some of these suggestions.
Now you have Hogg supporting Zohran Mamdami to. What a shit show.
That's the young leftist kind of candidates he wants to elect.
I tried to tell people this. They poo-poohed me and said "no, He just wants young and enthusiastic people". I knew that was BS all along.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5362894-david-hogg-iran-prims/?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwLHbG5jbGNrAsdsY2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAAEeC_kITC2sh118UWYNKI-EpYLkWQZYTMUp3D8DNMCdLiCs1dnA8NDnRpK95JU_aem_98MZffOSmGRwopPYydiuVw
If Democrats want to win men, they should do this: https://getbettersoon.substack.com/p/what-we-should-do-to-help-men
Great post! Agree 100%.
In addition to abandoning far left positions, the party needs to learn to communicate with "low information voters" -- the people who understandably choose to invest most of their time -not- in the details of politics.
We've got to boil the messaging down to something brief, substantive, and persuasive. Right now: where are the summaries and 1 pagers that describe the terrible impact the current budget bill will have on the vast majority of Americans?
Not 10,000 words on all the details and rabbit holes. Something short, simple and powerful that the voters we need will read (or watch) and find persuasive?
I dont think this is too pedantic a complaint: in footnote 1 you mention "The Tea Party" in the context of the 1990's. The Tea Party didnt exist until the whole 2008-2009 Obama bailout. The 90's had other names, "Gingrichites" maybe, although I dont think there was a specific movement title beyond "conservative". (Although I agree the Tea Party movement was a close successor to the first.)
D'OH! You're right. Gingrich Revolution, Tea Party, MAGA...they all blend together.
Those men are not coming back. People in rural America are not coming back. What the Democratic Party has become is extreme and pathetic and abhorrent. I’m a guy with an advanced degree, and I will never vote for a Democrat again. I’m just waiting for all the non-MAGA and non-TDS people to form a third party. But the established parties (especially the Dems) will always fight it tooth-and-nail.
Perhaps some common sense appeals would work for them, but then they would have to 180 on many of their positions, and what a horror it would be to lose the extreme left.
Dear Purple America, you are just kidding yourself if you think the current Democratic Party will bother to take your advice and become more sane. Not going to happen. President Trump and the Republican Party are now the party of the middle and working classes across all demographics. The Democrats can’t help themselves, they STILL have that sneering, insufferable, condescending stick up their asses attitude towards us ‘lessers’ in red flyover country. Have you seen the map of the 2024 election? It’s almost entirely red, except for the smattering of blue islands along the snotty West Coast and snobby Northeast. Latinos have pretty much ditched the Democrats. The reddest counties in the last election were not in Kansas, Oklahoma or West Virginia. Rather, they were along the Rio Grande in Texas, 80%-90% Hispanic. As for gay men and lesbians, we ‘normal gays’ are becoming more vocal and aggressive in wanting to ditch the TQIA+++ bullshit queer mob. My prediction: 60+ pickup of House seats next November for the Republicans and crossing the 60 Senate seats in the Senate; a landslide victory for JD Vance matching that of Richard Nixon in 1972 and Ronald Reagan in 1984. The sole state Tim Walz wins in 2028: Third time’s a charm Minnesota (1972, 1984, 2028). Why do I predict this with confidence? The Democrats simply will not change from the unhinged, leftist lunatics that they currently are.
I agree 100 percent with what you’re saying. But again, does it really matter?
Without doing anything, democrats are already predicted to win the house. Wont Trump fatigue do the rest in 2028? I don’t know (and again, I agree with you on the unique set of challenges Democrats face), but history shows that politics is cyclical.
Dems in Disarray has been germinating since 1964, when Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act (he told Bill Moyers “I think we may have lost the south for your lifetime – and mine.”
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/jan/22/we-may-have-lost-the-south-lbj-democrats-civil-rights-act-1964-bill-moyers )
Add the counterculture, the Vietnam fiasco, George Wallace, and you get the electoral map that put Nixon in the White House in 1968; add “Democrats for Nixon” and McGovern and you get the blowout in 1972. A moderate Southern governor (Carter) was able to buck the tide, but as you say, it wasn’t until another such governor appeared (Clinton) that the tide was turned for a while. And the tide would have stayed turned were it not for the vagaries of the Electoral College and the Supreme Court that handed the Presidency to George W. Bush. Idem the Electoral College, which kept Hillary Clinton out of office (though tbh, she should never have run after losing the nomination in 2008). Trump’s popular vote win last Fall is a disturbing trend, but I’d also say is down to Disarray of a unique sort (Biden thinking he could defeat time and win a second term, a less-than-perfect candidate who had to take his place and win in 100 days). That said, Trump is uniquely unpopular and term-limited, so a Democratic reset should be possible).