Democrats have an opportunity to be the broad church party here but at the same time will have to be wary of how difficult messaging will be.
A couple of notes on some recent material:
A recent 538 podcast discussed the racial realignment and addressed how minorities are shifting to Trump/the right. It's borne out in polling and recent results (2020). While still a relatively small shift is expected, why is happening and what are some structural issues around it? One particularly interesting point is that as communities desegregate and as people become more accustomed to diversity, they'll also be more inclined to have more diverse views. Case in point, older African Americans are staunchly Democrat, but younger African Americans are more likely to be Republican. While the percentages are still small, it's something to consider as the community/church/upbringing/experiences change. Asian voters shifted a bit to the right in the NY mayoral elections for example, and while that's not really going to have large political impact, Latino voters shifting right in Florida does. You can even see it in the politicians themselves: Francis Suarez (R)'s dad was a Democrat. Maria Salazar (R) represents FL-27 in Miami. Marco Rubio (R) is a Senator. While Cubans are going to have different experiences as immigrants, as second and third generations settle, they may see themselves as more "American" and be far more likely to fit into the typical "American" demographics of today (e.g. college-educated women are Democrat, no-college degree small business owner as Republican, etc). The "immigrant" identity that makes even conservative voters lean Democrat even in the face of their "values" (some Democratic Latino focus research groups have discussed this) may eventually subside.
This then leads into Nate Silver's piece on class:
https://www.natesilver.net/p/how-culture-trumps-economic-classEssentially, as we all know, historically, Democrats are the party of the working class and also low-wage workers in general. But as trends have shifted, for the first time in 2020 (after threatening to for multiple elections), Democrats actually won voters with $100K+ wages. They also won voters with <$25K wages. But as polls initially show for 2024, they're expected to consolidate the gains among high earners but are threatened with potentially losing lower wage workers. The Democratic party cannot be driven by the historically typical white working class/labor union/city dweller/etc group. College education is become more ubiquitous (though not the majority yet), and that trend has been long in the making (Democrats and GOP used to be even among college educated but it's now 2/3rd Democrats). The change is so much that one GOP analyst basically admitted that they've given up on appealing to college educated women, instead focusing on non college educated voters, minorities, and other groups.
Now, the true elite old money types are probably still going to be GOP (and their offspring). Likewise, rich non college educated types are also going to be GOP. But you have some young people (children of lower middle, middle, and upper middle classes) that graduate with not a lot of money but will in 10/15/20 years be high earners. Mostly in white collar jobs. 60% of new incoming college classes are women as well. As the Democrats trend more here, they become increasingly stretched in how they can message the economy. For example, during COVID lockdowns, it makes sense to shut everything down, but this has a divergent effect for a UX designer working remotely at home vs. a small business Las Vegas contractor worried about the future of casinos. So how do the Democrats message here?
GDP growth is astonishingly high. Wages have been going up (even moreso for lower earners). Unemployment is near record lows. Stock market is near all time highs. So the Democrats should be shouting this from the rooftops, correct? Yet, doesn't this seem somewhat "Traditional Republican" to you? Like, if you're making $100K, getting 401K retirement matching, and you're working from home, life is great. If you're a contractor/worker at a small business, and one form of enjoyment includes eating out at casual restaurants, is life great? This is the conundrum of a broad church party. Democrats are supposed to be the party of the working class, but they're heavily indexed on college educated voters (who typically make more than non college educated voters over the course of their lifetimes). Are they really the party of the working class? (They'll say the answer is yes, but the messaging is hard).
You can look at the UK with its stronger roots in labor. The Labour Party is surely the party of the working class? In 2019, it suffered one of its worst electoral defeats ever, with a very left Corbyn at the party helm. But look closely at the results: prominent Tories like IDS and Raab (in Esher!) were hanging on. Justine Greening didn't even bother running in Putney (her margins went from 25% to 4% from 2015 to 2017). Labour won Kensington in 2017. A long-term Tory in Canterbury was ousted in 2017 also, and Labour retained the seat in 2019. Imagine an election where Labour was so strong in Putney that the incumbent Tory gave up. Surely that rivals Blair's 418? Like if Jeremy Corbyn can appeal to well-to-do southerners, he'll have this in the bag! Obviously, as we know, the demographic shift accelerated by Brexit changed all that. One of Labour's only true triumphs in 2019 was their dominance among college educated voters (43-29 vs Tories). Is that the party of the working class? (Labour will say yes, but the messaging didn't resonate due to Brexit).
The Democrats haven't been truly left-wing for a long time, but they do outperform other left-leaning parties around the world (through outwitting the GOP on a host of issues and pouncing on the GOP's unpopular social policies), and their broad church is powerful. But it can also be tenuous.
They now outperform historical results in midterms and special elections (because well to-do college educated types vote more typically; women might marginally vote more than men). But a presidential election? It's a different game. Trump brought out a lot of first-time voters. He excites a lot of apolitical people. That doesn't play for midterms, but it does for presidential elections.
So the question are:
1. Can they appeal to the $100K "laptop" class and the working class at the same time?
2. Can they win appeal for non-college educated women and recapture younger minorities and younger men? Do they care to if they are less frequent voters?
3. Will the GOP's appeal to these groups be successful? Post-Trump, will the GOP revert back to the Mitt Romney types (and the votes by wage bracket trends shift back) or will they carry on that "Trump" approach? How does their appeal to younger men and minorities clash with their appeal to old money?
4. Can the Democrats dominate the short term (shore up the college-educated voters, still appeal to working class and minorities heavily) or could they hit a geographic and demographic nadir (too indexed on geographies and demographies that don't win over the right voters and lose enough working class and minorities in the wrong areas)?
Shifts had been underway and 2016 really brought that out. What is next? As the party in charge, the Democrats need to message, but what is their core message (not from the perspective of anti-GOP but from the perspective of the Democrat platform)?
