Stanley Feldman, a political scientist at Stony Brook University, wrote by email that
a substantial fraction of Trump (MAGA) supporters believe that demographic change and changes in gender norms are a threat to their way of life and to their status in American society. Most importantly, Republicans (and influencers) have successfully convinced many people that Democrats and liberals are directly responsible for creating and supporting the social forces that they are frightened of.
Some Democrats, Feldman wrote,
are talking about toning down rhetoric on hot button social issues like transgender rights and taking a harder line on immigration. It’s true that it would benefit Democrats if these sorts of issues became less politically salient. I’m not sure how easy this will be, however.
How much can Democrats move away from being a socially inclusive party without alienating some of their supporters? And how far would Democrats have to moderate their positions and rhetoric on social issues to prevent Republicans from continuing to paint them as out-of-touch urban liberals who care more about L.G.B.T.Q. rights than the plight of white workers? Just think about how many anti-trans ads the Trump campaign ran against Kamala Harris. It doesn’t take much to play on people’s fears and create easy targets.
Along similar lines, Mohammad Atari, a professor in the department of psychological and brain sciences at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and director of the university’s Culture and Morality Lab, wrote by email to say that
the combination of the perceived elite status of many Democratic leaders and their lack of emotional resonance can indeed make their policy proposals feel empty, or even disingenuous, to working-class voters. This disconnect stems from both cultural and emotional dynamics that influence how policies are received, irrespective of their actual merits.
This “elitism” perception is not just about education but also about lifestyle and values, which may seem out of touch with the struggles of working-class folks. When proposals are delivered in a tone that reflects elite sensibilities, they risk being dismissed as “not for us.”
“Almost everywhere you look,” Fareed Zakaria, a columnist at The Washington Post and an analyst at CNN, wrote on Jan. 4,
the left is in ruins. Of the 27 countries of the European Union, only a handful have left-of-center parties leading government coalitions. The primary left-of-center party in the European Parliament now has just 136 seats in a 720-seat chamber.
Even in countries that have been able to stem the rise of right-wing populism, such as Poland, it is the center-right that is thriving, not the left. And in the United States, of course, the breadth of Donald Trump’s victory — nearly 90 percent of U.S. counties moved right — suggests that it is very much part of this trend.
In Zakaria’s view, the problems of the left are caused by its failures:
The crisis of democratic government, then, is actually a crisis of progressive government. People seem to feel that they have been taxed, regulated, bossed around and intimidated by left-of-center politicians for decades — but the results are bad and have been getting worse.
Zakaria warns:
If Democrats do not learn some hard lessons from the poor governance in many blue cities and states, they will be seen as defending cultural elites, woke ideology and bloated, inefficient government. That might be a formula for permanent minority status.
In a reflection of the scope of dispute on these issues, Charles Kupchan, a professor of international affairs at Georgetown and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, declared in an email: “I fundamentally disagree with the proposition that Trump’s re-election is a watershed moment marking the demise of the progressive cause.”
Instead, Kupchan argued, “Trump’s victory reflected an anti-incumbent wave, not a decisive rightward shift.”
Electorates in many democracies, Kupchan pointed out, “are living through the same socio-economic disruptions as Americans — disruptions born of digital technology and globalization. They, too, are voting for change.”
Kupchan noted that internationally, the anti-incumbent movement has resulted in the defeat of both left and right:
In cases where right-wing parties have held power, the left has come out on top. In the United Kingdom, Poland, and Brazil, center-left governments have recently replaced the right-wing governments.
While parties on the left in many nations are struggling, it is hardly smooth sailing for those on the right.
Ivo Daalder, chief executive of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, acknowledged that “there is no doubt that liberalism, and the left generally, are having a tough moment in established democracies — not only in the U.S., but in much of Europe as well.”
