Photo via PBS
***
Now, I know that this might sound crazy. President-elect Donald Trump stands for everything the Democratic Party is trying to fight against. Why would they need someone like him? In 2016, Donald Trump shocked the country and world by being elected the 44th president of the United States. The billionaire TV personality came into the race with no political experience, little support from Republican leadership, and myriad controversies, unlike the typical politician. It wasn’t until Trump’s nearly sweeping victory in the Republican primaries that his campaign and bid for president was taken seriously.
So how did he manage to defy the odds and break conventions to gain the Republican nomination and win the presidency? Trump knew how to mobilize people by exploiting their anger and frustrations. Working-class Americans felt ignored and not represented by party leaders and the establishment on both sides of the political aisle. They were fed up with the ruling elite’s disconnect from their everyday struggles. Trump resonated with these working-class Americans by railing against the establishment. He wasn’t afraid to call out and humiliate party leaders.
Trump didn’t shy away from making bold, controversial, and often misleading claims about the country and its leaders. “He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured,” Trump said of Republican Senator and veteran John McCain—a comment that for many, along with racist remarks about immigrants and sexist insults, would seem to have crossed the line. For Trump, however, statements such as these turned into the defining feature of his campaign. He was a candidate who was unlike other politicians and had no desire to act like one. His controversial comments characterizing the country as a “dumping ground for everybody else’s problems,” along with his message of urgency to solve the nation’s “crisis,” were well received by voters. According to exit poll research, 69% of the voters who said that things in the US have gotten “seriously off on the wrong track” also voted for Trump, and about a quarter of those polled expressed anger about how the federal government was functioning.
Trump’s recent win makes him the first Republican to win the popular vote in twenty years and reflects a continuation of the “purging” he began in the Republican Party in 2016. This is the same restructuring that the Democrats need today if they want a chance of flipping Congress in the 2026 midterms and taking back the White House in 2028.
The 2024 elections resulted in humiliating and crippling losses for the Democratic Party across the board. Republicans have successfully won the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives, a trifecta of control for the Trump administration. Under Trump’s leadership, the Republican Party will undoubtedly exploit this unified power to push Trump’s extreme campaign promises and the dangerous Project 2025 agenda.
Suppose political trends and history are reflected in the 2026 midterms, though. In that case, the Democrats have a fair shot at taking back control of at least the House, but this can only happen if the party undergoes some profound reshaping and does some intense soul-searching in the wake of recent losses. The party desperately needs reforms that reflect the current electorate’s needs, because it was out of touch this time.
Within hours of election results coming in, some Democrats started playing the “blame game,” finding anyone and anything to blame for the loss of the presidency. This includes the very constituents their campaign failed to cater to, with some hardline Democrats attacking Muslim voters for Harris’s loss and other supporters casting blame onto Latino voters who have drastically shifted from the Democratic Party since both the 2020 and 2016 elections. Others blame the campaign leadership, which was left to run one of the shortest campaigns in history after Biden’s exit from the race. Others claim the Democrats’ reliance on identity politics pushed voters away. No matter the reason for the party’s declining support, there is a clear need for someone to come in and shake things up, as it can be argued that Trump did to the Republican Party in 2016. The Democratic Party is a political machine lacking a clear leader and central message to connect to voters and regain the base.
In 2008, former President Barack Obama provided the messaging the Democratic Party needed. Running on the campaign slogan “Change We Can Believe In,” Obama offered something new and fresh in the eyes of voters at a time when people were struggling with the 2008 financial crisis and feeling frustrated by the government’s involvement in conflicts abroad. He was the type of candidate the world and party hadn’t seen before. He didn’t carry the type of baggage that career politicians had, and people felt they could relate to him. The 2008 primary debates became rather heated as Obama called Hillary Clinton out for being part of the establishment, and Clinton fired back with mockery of his dream to transform Washington and his message of unity.
Today, though, the successful Obama era of unity, change, and connection with the constituency has ended, and those trying to cling to this idea and keep it alive are sadly misguided. However, today’s Democratic leadership can learn a thing or two from the Obama coalition on base mobilization and strong messaging.
In a recent opinion piece from the New York Times, political columnist David Brooks claims there is a need for a “Bernie Sanders-style disruption” to shake up the Democratic establishment and make people uncomfortable. Brooks points to the shift in the partisan divide in America to the “diploma divide” between those with college degrees and those without. He goes on to explain the bitterness and aggression that some working-class voters feel toward the political elite of the Democratic leadership. The Harris campaign extensively touted and drew attention to the stark inequalities dividing this country, from gender to race, but forgot the clear divide that education inequalities cause. The Democrats ran on a message of preserving democracy and upholding democratic institutions, failing to resonate with the voting base, who already felt these institutions were not working for them.
Trump has built his coalition around the working class with a unifying message and attacked the Democrats for their “elitism” and disconnect from the everyday American. Similarly, Obama ran on a message of change and promised to work for working-class Americans. Today, we are entering a new era still very much defined by anti-establishment sentiments, anger at the elite, and a desire for change. However, only one party seems to be transforming these frustrations into success. Suppose the Democratic Party wants a chance to regain working-class voters. In that case, they need a drastic change in messaging to reflect strong and growing anti-establishment sentiments.
***
This article was edited by Francesca Rosario Bolastig and Hannorah Ragusa.
