Thomas Edsall is one of the smartest op-ed writers at the New York Times. His latest op-ed is about how well-to-do people are contributing to and voting for the Democrats as much as the poor these days. The Democratic Party now holds the majority of the most affluent congressional districts in America.
Source: How Did the Democrats Become Favorites of the Rich? – The New York Times.
The median income of Republican districts is slightly less than that of Democratic Party congressional districts. The Republicans are no longer the party of the well-off albeit by a whisker on average. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are doing their best as predicted by the Directors’ Law. They service the swinging voter who is a middle-class voter.
Source: How Did the Democrats Become Favorites of the Rich? – The New York Times.
I first noticed this trend in in the best TV soapy of 2008. In the 2008 presidential primaries campaign, Hillary Clinton just talked all the time about the struggles of the middle class and will again in her 2016 campaign. Obama was no different.
A key reason for the withering away of the proletariat in Democratic Party campaign rhetoric is too many of the swinging voters are not in the working class and there are many more many members of the middle classes. One consequence of the withering away of the proletariat is parties that claim to represent the working class are representing a shrinking electorate. They must adapt or face permanent opposition.
Source: The Problem With Middle-Class Populism – The New York Times.
The Democrats do well among the college educated voters. Obama won this over Romney in 2012 by 10 percentage points. This may explain why the Democrats are slightly conflicting: they must win the working class vote as well as the college educated vote to win. The risk for the Democratic party of basing its support in the middle-class is this middle-class is fiscally conservative and rather unwilling to pay for any large-scale redistribution of wealth because it will come out of their very own pockets.
One reason that the Democratic Party and many parties on the centre-left moved into the politics of identity is that allows them to better target their policies towards people who might switch their vote to them all this at the expense of the welfare of the working class. By targeting race, gender, sexual orientation and ethnicity, the policies of the Democratic Party moved away from promoting the general welfare towards servicing their specific voting constituencies. The social liberalism of the Democratic Parties is part of this servicing of their constituencies.
Source: How Did the Democrats Become Favorites of the Rich? – The New York Times.
Do not get your hopes up with Bernie Sanders. He too is the favourite of the middle class and college students – expressive voters all. The working class and minorities do not actually have much time for him. Bernie Sanders has terrible polling among black Democratic voters and about 90% of blacks vote Democrat.
Source: How Did the Democrats Become Favorites of the Rich? – The New York Times
There is certainly a lot of straight median voter theorem in the Democratic Party being co-opted by the middle-class but there is more than that. There is the issue of smart political communication in the era of The Great Enrichment. Andrew Cherlin showed some insight into both the basics of political communication about identity and expressive politics when he observed that:
Politicians may prefer to call working-class families by the class position they aspire to rather than the one they hold.
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments