Dr Magoon, I think this is a tremendous essay. I am currently working on a post that tries to express many of the same ideas. I know I will be quoting several paragraphs from this post.
This fails to account for the millions of 9mostly) white working class voters who supported Bernie in the Democratic presidential primaries, but then switched to Trump in the 2016, 2020, and 2024 general elections. It’s true that Bernie’s core support came from young college-educated leftists (not all from privileged economic backgrounds, by the way). But that doesn’t account for the breadth of his support, especially in 2016. Bernie had strong working class backing. But he couldn’t get over the hump because Hillary had support not only from centrists and the party establishment, but also among Black and Latino voters, core Democratic constituencies that can be decisive in Democratic primaries. Th main takeaway,, is that Bernie’s brand of left-wing economic populism did appeal to many of the same working class voters who subsequently fell for Trump’s faux populist appeal.
I am not trying to account for voting behavior in this article. This article is about the beliefs of ordinary working-class voters.
I am glad that we agree “that Bernie’s core support came from young college-educated leftists.” That was exactly my point regarding Sanders.
I never said that Sanders had no working-class support. Obviously, he did. The fact that so many switched to Trump shows that their support was never really based on “ left-wing economic populism” to begin with.
Perhaps, I have not seen any good data on the topic.
If you define “downwardly mobile” very broadly, then all twenty-something persons are in that category.
Children live off the income of their middle aged parents and become used to that standard of living, and young people almost always have lower income than middle aged people because they have not yet acquired the necessary experience and skills. This feels like downward mobility but it is really “just starting out.”
When I was in my twenties, I thought that I would never have the income and wealth of my parents, but now decades later I do.
Our political discourse completely ignores how much income and wealth vary by age and how in the long run this evens out.
Do you really believe that the Republicans show more merit and competence versus the Democrats?To me the assertion that working class voters care about merit and competence is risible. I would like it to be true, but it clearly is not. To make it make sense you’d have to also believe that they are just incredibly misguided and wrong about merit and competence, but I don’t have that much condescension in me.
This article is not really about the merit and competence of the two parties or politicians.
I never said that “ working class voters care about merit and competence” in political parties and candidates. I was talking about their co-workers, bosses, managers, and owners of the company that they work for.
You are missing the main point of this article which is:
1) Economic populism appeals mainly to college-educated professionals who are already loyal Democratic voters.
2) Working-class populism is opposed to the above.
I agree with Kathleen Weber that this is a very good essay.
I also perceive you are describing general groups with variations towards and away from the mean, so the variations are subject to inclusion or exclusion, but they exist. I would almost say your descriptions are "broad brush" but that has (to me) a negative connotation I don't mean to imply.
I would think that the working class values competence from their political leaders and government employees in general, as well as their private sector co-workers, et al. But bureaucracies have their limitations and many other cross incentives apply there as well.
I am not sure if I agree with yanina exactly, but she is close to the query I wanted to make about Charles Murray's book Coming Apart. I guess Belmonters are not necessarily all misguided college educated professionals, but some are, even if they also value competence as they view it, marriage, hard work, etc. In that regard Murray (and yanina?) says they hold similar values that you attribute to the working class group.
I’m not missing it, I mostly agree with it. However the portion about competence was allegedly also about politics and is the portion that made your portrayal of working class values sympathetic so I think it’s important that it’s not true. The other sympathetic part might be “Family” and that’s also totally false because all human beings value family, it is actually what we can all connect on. And if we actually go by measurable indications the professional upper middle class values family far more than the working class (I would not actually assert that myself.) Or did you actually mean patriarchal authoritarian power for the man in the family when you say “Family”?
I didn’t think you were doing either of those things. I think that in addition to making your basic point you were trying to present the working class as morally justifiable, ethically on the same level or above the professional class, without having to call them stupid. But the argument for that moral claim falls apart under any scrutiny or analysis which is why when I try to decipher what valuing competence or family means in the context of this political values divide you say you weren’t saying much about them (and professionals as a class value these things too). I don’t agree that most people don’t realize that the Dems have lost the working class or don’t have explanations for that - it’s just that those explanations are extremely unflattering to the working class. I’m open to new explanations but you haven’t offered any here. I mean, yes they think a booming economy is more important than welfare, even though they regularly use some safety net benefits and low unemployment is key to easily finding a job… and Republicans have regularly wrecked the economy while Dems do better… and unions have been the path to prosperity for the working class…
You keep assuming that I was saying something different than I actually wrote.
No, I was not trying to “ present the working class as morally justifiable.”
I was just trying to explain why “economic populism” from Democrats will not attract working-class voters. It will only attract professional class voters who are already voting Democratic.
I never claimed that no one has made these observations before. To the extent that others have, they have obviously not changed the beliefs of Democratic strategists and pundits because they keep repeating the same mistakes.
I never said anything about which party mange’s the economy better.
Well done. You laid out the hypocrisy of the Left. Feeling morally superior gives them the right to tell anyone what to do and how to live. No different than the Globalists. Surprised they haven't burnt the US to the ground after Trumps win. Maybe thats coming.
Dr Magoon, I think this is a tremendous essay. I am currently working on a post that tries to express many of the same ideas. I know I will be quoting several paragraphs from this post.
Thanks for the compliment, and I am glad that you enjoyed the article.
You do not need to call me “Dr Magoon” though. I am not much into formalities.
What do you prefer?
On my Substack, no name is necessary. Elsewhere, you can just call me Michael Magoon.
This fails to account for the millions of 9mostly) white working class voters who supported Bernie in the Democratic presidential primaries, but then switched to Trump in the 2016, 2020, and 2024 general elections. It’s true that Bernie’s core support came from young college-educated leftists (not all from privileged economic backgrounds, by the way). But that doesn’t account for the breadth of his support, especially in 2016. Bernie had strong working class backing. But he couldn’t get over the hump because Hillary had support not only from centrists and the party establishment, but also among Black and Latino voters, core Democratic constituencies that can be decisive in Democratic primaries. Th main takeaway,, is that Bernie’s brand of left-wing economic populism did appeal to many of the same working class voters who subsequently fell for Trump’s faux populist appeal.
I am not trying to account for voting behavior in this article. This article is about the beliefs of ordinary working-class voters.
I am glad that we agree “that Bernie’s core support came from young college-educated leftists.” That was exactly my point regarding Sanders.
I never said that Sanders had no working-class support. Obviously, he did. The fact that so many switched to Trump shows that their support was never really based on “ left-wing economic populism” to begin with.
There is no such thing as “faux populist.”
You are missing the main point of this article which is:
1) Economic populism appeals mainly (though not exclusively) to college-educated professionals who are already loyal Democratic voters
2) Working-class populism is opposed to the above.
In fact I suspect the main base for economic populism is the downwardly mobile children of elites.
Perhaps, I have not seen any good data on the topic.
If you define “downwardly mobile” very broadly, then all twenty-something persons are in that category.
Children live off the income of their middle aged parents and become used to that standard of living, and young people almost always have lower income than middle aged people because they have not yet acquired the necessary experience and skills. This feels like downward mobility but it is really “just starting out.”
When I was in my twenties, I thought that I would never have the income and wealth of my parents, but now decades later I do.
Our political discourse completely ignores how much income and wealth vary by age and how in the long run this evens out.
Do you really believe that the Republicans show more merit and competence versus the Democrats?To me the assertion that working class voters care about merit and competence is risible. I would like it to be true, but it clearly is not. To make it make sense you’d have to also believe that they are just incredibly misguided and wrong about merit and competence, but I don’t have that much condescension in me.
This article is not really about the merit and competence of the two parties or politicians.
I never said that “ working class voters care about merit and competence” in political parties and candidates. I was talking about their co-workers, bosses, managers, and owners of the company that they work for.
You are missing the main point of this article which is:
1) Economic populism appeals mainly to college-educated professionals who are already loyal Democratic voters.
2) Working-class populism is opposed to the above.
I agree with Kathleen Weber that this is a very good essay.
I also perceive you are describing general groups with variations towards and away from the mean, so the variations are subject to inclusion or exclusion, but they exist. I would almost say your descriptions are "broad brush" but that has (to me) a negative connotation I don't mean to imply.
I would think that the working class values competence from their political leaders and government employees in general, as well as their private sector co-workers, et al. But bureaucracies have their limitations and many other cross incentives apply there as well.
I am not sure if I agree with yanina exactly, but she is close to the query I wanted to make about Charles Murray's book Coming Apart. I guess Belmonters are not necessarily all misguided college educated professionals, but some are, even if they also value competence as they view it, marriage, hard work, etc. In that regard Murray (and yanina?) says they hold similar values that you attribute to the working class group.
I’m not missing it, I mostly agree with it. However the portion about competence was allegedly also about politics and is the portion that made your portrayal of working class values sympathetic so I think it’s important that it’s not true. The other sympathetic part might be “Family” and that’s also totally false because all human beings value family, it is actually what we can all connect on. And if we actually go by measurable indications the professional upper middle class values family far more than the working class (I would not actually assert that myself.) Or did you actually mean patriarchal authoritarian power for the man in the family when you say “Family”?
I am glad that you mostly agree.
I think that you misunderstand what I was trying to say in the article on these other issues.
Again, I was not trying to judge the relative competence of Democrats and Republicans.
I never said anything about what professionals believe about family or patriarchy.
If you agree on the main point of the article, that is good enough for me.
I didn’t think you were doing either of those things. I think that in addition to making your basic point you were trying to present the working class as morally justifiable, ethically on the same level or above the professional class, without having to call them stupid. But the argument for that moral claim falls apart under any scrutiny or analysis which is why when I try to decipher what valuing competence or family means in the context of this political values divide you say you weren’t saying much about them (and professionals as a class value these things too). I don’t agree that most people don’t realize that the Dems have lost the working class or don’t have explanations for that - it’s just that those explanations are extremely unflattering to the working class. I’m open to new explanations but you haven’t offered any here. I mean, yes they think a booming economy is more important than welfare, even though they regularly use some safety net benefits and low unemployment is key to easily finding a job… and Republicans have regularly wrecked the economy while Dems do better… and unions have been the path to prosperity for the working class…
Please stop telling me what I was saying. If you continue to do so, I will delete your comments.
You keep assuming that I was saying something different than I actually wrote.
No, I was not trying to “ present the working class as morally justifiable.”
I was just trying to explain why “economic populism” from Democrats will not attract working-class voters. It will only attract professional class voters who are already voting Democratic.
I never claimed that no one has made these observations before. To the extent that others have, they have obviously not changed the beliefs of Democratic strategists and pundits because they keep repeating the same mistakes.
I never said anything about which party mange’s the economy better.
Well done. You laid out the hypocrisy of the Left. Feeling morally superior gives them the right to tell anyone what to do and how to live. No different than the Globalists. Surprised they haven't burnt the US to the ground after Trumps win. Maybe thats coming.