The Growing Realignment

Why This Race is Close, and What Dems Need to Change to Compete in the Future

Fareed Zakaria, the host of “Global Public Square” and Washington Post opinion columnist, is one of the few opinion writers I know that really has a sense as to where American politics currently is and where it is headed. He’s a brilliant writer, and in the ‘90s coined the term “Illiberal Democracy” to describe the trend of the slow descent of democracies into authoritarianism. Much of what he discusses regularly comes to pass and he’s about as objective a person when it comes to economics, politics and global affairs as one will find.

Last week, he posted an opinion piece about the current realignment happening in American politics; how it is morphing from an economics based standard to one centered on education. He’s right on this. There is always a back and forth in politics between economics and cultural issues, and since Trump came into office (you can even go back a little further and see the seeds post 9/11) the divide between college educated and non-college educated has come to much more define the two parties. Now, when the economy is humming along, history shows that people pay less attention to it and instead focus on cultural issues; it’s only when the economy sucks that people really pay attention to economic concerns. But what Zakaria particularly noted was how Democrats are completely flat footed in adapting to this new dynamic of what cultural issues and groups, and more importantly to what extent and orthodoxy they profess, comprise their party. People are paying less attention to the economic ladder as to where political organizations are grouping around, and are instead basing them more on intellectualism and education.

“The economic paradox is even more profound when you consider that the Biden administration’s policies have been specifically designed to benefit the working class, made up largely of men without a college degree — and they have disproportionately benefited this group. And yet Harris is on track to receive the lowest share of this group’s votes in decades, with a deficit 9 points worse than Biden’s in 2020, according to New York Times polls. Add to this consistent polling that shows that Black and Hispanic men are moving away from the Democratic Party in historic numbers…

“Democratic elites have been slow to understand this shift. They have persisted in believing that the working class is deluded or has been conned by the right into voting against its own interests. That’s why the party under Biden has made a broad shift to the populist left on economic policy — from tariffs to manufacturing subsidies. And yet, it hasn’t wooed back the working class. In fact, polling has often shown that Bernie Sanders and his economic policies are much more popular with the educated elites in the Democratic Party than with working-class voters.

“The Democratic elites do not want to believe that their problem is not that they moved too far right on economic policy but rather that they moved too far left on social and cultural issues. For them, economic policy is a matter of choice — practical decisions that can easily be changed. Social issues are a matter of core rights; to be against them is to be a bad and bigoted person.”

As Fareed notes, the single biggest indicators of how someone votes is not economics, but education, gender, geography and religion. The American left is now urban/cosmopolitan, college educated, secular, coastal and female, while the American right is now regional, rural/suburban, religious, male and not college educated. Looking at the two, it would be very easy for those on the right to call the left “elitist” and for those on the left to call the right “stupid.” When we look at it from a political spectrum, the elements the left sees of right are that the right favors bigotry, misogyny, guns, evengelicalism, ignorance (which means more of them do manual work or are in the military) and less of a global conscience. It’s no wonder it is so easy for the left to see fascism-adjacence in most conservative politicians, especially to those that cater the loudest to this base, such as Trump.

And therein lies the problem. For the most progressive of Democrats, adhering to a set of beliefs and saying “Either you are with us or you are against us,” particularly when such positions are advocated from such an extreme uncompromising position, puts more people outside of that circle than in it. Take any of the major cultural issues today and while Democrats have the right intent, their tendency to attempt to disqualify or diminish any dissent, that “righteous indignation” and “condescension” common in educated elite circles, only serves to alienate and isolate potential allies. It’s why commercials like the below are so powerful; because they stick.

Watching Democrats fumble responses about Palestinians/Gaza protests is but one other example. The uproar over Tony Dukoupil interviewing Ta-Nehisi Coates is another. Pointing out young men are being left behind in society is another. Bring it up to many Democratic elites, and you’re more likely to be labeled a terrorist sympathizer (or anti-semite depending on which side you fall on), a racist or a misogynist respectively, rather than someone pointing out flaws in logic, areas of compromise, or things to work on to improve American society.

It is no shock that this kind of mentality conforms to the areas most represented by America’s colleges and universities. Below is a map showing where most of the colleges are represented.

Notice a trend? Where there are more universities, Democrats tend to do better. It’s also why states like North Carolina and increasingly Texas are targeted by Democrats; Dems can organize around the college campuses and speak to more educated groups and academics. The problem is though that most Americans don’t go to college. Non college educated voters make up 67% of the electorate. Instead, they tend to work more manual labor jobs, join the military or start small businesses. These people tend to dislike academia, a lot. So as Democrats try to appeal to low income individuals economically, they get further and further separated from them culturally.

And this transcends race and other cultural divides too. Zakaria again:

“These new divisions are even overwhelming that deepest of divides: race and ethnicity. More and more Black and Hispanic men are finding themselves comfortable with the Republican Party — and it’s especially pronounced with young people. A recent GenForward survey showed one-quarter of young Black men and 44 percent of young Latino men are planning on voting for Donald Trump… On the other hand, Harris, a biracial woman, may yet receive more of the White vote than did Biden, an old White guy. Professional White women see themselves represented by Harris because social class and gender trump race.”

And this is the Democrats’ conundrum in 2024 and going forward. Whenever I talk with Democrats about what could prevent Harris from winning, their pat responses are usually along the lines of "racism,” “sexism” or some form of voter suppression. It’s inconceivable to them that much of the liberal attitude towards swing voters is often condescension or off-putting elitism. This strain isn’t just at the top level either, you can see it all the way down to current Gen Z college students. There’s just this assumptive quality that to many Democrats, if someone disagrees with them “They just don’t know” and somehow more information would help. In most cases, that’s the opposite approach that should be taken; people may already know what Dems want to tell them, but either disagree with the premise or the extent with which Dems want to push it.

The fact is that if Harris loses, it won’t be because anything she did or didn’t do or who she is as a person; she’s run a flawless and near perfect campaign, wisely deflecting away from many of these hardcore left positions and saying everything she needs to court moderate swing voters. If she loses, it’ll be because people look at Democrats and see them as less welcoming and less in tune with where those voters are, which is expanded upon by liberal activists. In short, they see them as snobs that cater too much to select groups. To win elections, you have to grow in popularity and appeal to people all over the country. You can’t just say “we’re right, you’re wrong, and we have the diplomas to prove it.” Democrats would be wise to take less dogmatic and ideological positions on many of these cultural issues,or demonstrate a far more level of understanding than they have and instead consider practical ones such as the immigration bill they cynically pushed (promoted only to put Republicans and Trump in a bind). Seriously, Harris should say she’ll sign it if passed again. She should shout down the squad and pro-HAMAS protesters. She should discredit a lot of social positions popular in academia and nowhere else like reparations and trans athletes competing in women’s sports. The ad previously featured above has Harris on record promoting trans surgeries and medication for prison inmates when she was Attorney General in California, an issue that impacted all of 2 actual cases in California; the cost to the Harris campaign of that ad will be substantially more than 2 voters swinging to Trump. Democrats have to appear less orthodox and more practical in many of these identity politics issues or face a continued shrinking of moderate voters considering them as options.

If she does that, not only will Democrats win in 2024, but 2028 and beyond as well.

PurpleAmerica’s Cultural Corner

Come next Tuesday, once election returns come back and we see who voted where, there are three numbers I’m particularly interested in seeing:

1. Can Harris get >36% of the white non-college male voters (Biden got 36% compared to Clinton's 28%). If she can, coupled with the women's and POC votes, she should be doing OK. This is going to be close; if her numbers look like Clinton's be ready for a long night/week/month/next four years. Some recent polls show her doing just that, at or below Clinton’s mark. The gender gap is going to be huge; if she can bring some white men with her she’ll win. Right now, it’s looking…eesh.

2. According to Pew, ONE IN FOUR voters who voted in 2020 did not vote in 2016. Biden won them 2:1. Can Harris match that? This is expected to be the first election where Millenials/Gen X constitute a majority of the voters. Boomers are going to be in a substantial minority, and are being replaced quickly by Gen Z. If the increase remains the same as it did in 2020 and Dems keep that 2:1 advantage, Harris should be in OK shape. I'm skeptical here though. I see a huge drop off in new young voters but the ratio is going to be roughly the same. Call it a hunch.

3. What does the suburban vote look like? Clinton lost it with only 45% while Biden won it with 54%. This year, it’s expected to be somewhere between those two extremes. If Harris breaks even or does better than 50%, that will determine if she becomes the first Madam President.

PurpleAmerica’s Obscure Fact of the Day

This one goes back to my old political science undergrad days:

What are the two biggest factors in how someone will vote in any given election? It’s not policy positions or education or race/gender….

It’s whether or not that voter had personally met the candidate and whether that candidate is the incumbent.

PurpleAmerica’s Final Word on the Subject

By every practical measure the Biden Presidency has been a success over where we were four years ago. We’ve seen how Trump governed and where it led the nation. Yes, the political realignment is still occurring. Nonetheless, it would be a travesty if Harris lost because there were too many Republicans choosing not to use common sense, and too many smarmy Democrats endlessly pointing it out.

LIKE WHAT YOU SEE? MAKE SURE TO SUBSCRIBE AND SHARE!!!

Footnotes and Fun Stuff