In his column in the Washington Post Fareed Zakaria asks a very good question. The Democrats used to be an “optimistic, forward-looking party”.
What changed? The left wing of the Democratic Party argues that Obama and his ilk got in bed with business and tech, embraced right-wing economics and, over time, lost the working-class vote.
The problem with this argument is that the facts point in the opposite direction. As Ezra Klein, one of today’s shrewdest observers of economic policy, notes, “Since Bill Clinton … the party’s economic policy has become relentlessly more left. Barack Obama was well to Bill Clinton’s left. Hillary Clinton ran on an agenda well to Barack Obama’s left. Joe Biden ran on an agenda — and governed on an agenda — to Hillary Clinton’s left.”
And over those decades, the Democratic Party’s support among working-class voters has cratered. Bill Clinton won the noncollege vote by 14 points in 1996. Kamala Harris lost it by 14 points in 2024 — a 28-point drop. And yet every time they lose blue-collar voters, Democrats decide they must go even further left on economic policy.
concluding:
The Democratic Party has become a party of urban, educated, middle- and upper-middle-class voters, allied with minorities and young people. Apparently, the only major group with which Harris gained vote share in the election was White college educated voters. And yet the party remains deeply uncomfortable with its new base, still pining for its working-class roots. And so it turns on business, technologists, risk-seeking young men — who after a while, having begun to notice that the party doesn’t like them, are now returning the favor.
There’s a factor I think that Mr. Zakaria should consider. There has been a very notable geopolitical and economic development since Bill Clinton was president. China has gone from being a poor country to an upper middle income country. Could the Democratic leadership be seeking to emulate China?
There are many reasons the Chinese model may be attractive to them including the influence the party has on the economy and the wage premium of party membership. However, there are also many reasons that China is a poor model for the United States, most notably its very high degree of homogeneity and attendant social cohesion.
That’s weird. I have never heard anyone say China should be our model. On topic I think Dems have tried to deliver things they think working class people (there’s a poorly defined term) would want like health care and education. However, the GOP after leading the effort to export jobs to China now claims they can bring them back with tariffs and some people actually believe them. I also think that the non-educated part of the working class is much more anti-gay and trans than Dems realized.
OT. Interesting chart on Russian ruble. They are still running an inflation rate of about 10% if memory serves. They have set their equivalent of Fed rates at 20%-21% to keep it from getting worse. Meanwhile, the govt is handing out mortgage loans at 8%. In the poor ares of the country they are handing out the equivalent of about 25 years of pay as death benefits to make sure they get enough recruits. The numbers dont sound sustainable.
https://econbrowser.com/archives/2024/11/the-ruble-under-pressure
Steve
Obamacare is great, until you need to use it. Deductibles and co-pays are not covered. The supplement will lower the premium, but the premium is still based on the deductible and co-pays.
It only sounds great to people who do not need it.