How Democrats' Focus on Identity Politics Lost the Working Class

As Joe Biden's presidency draws to a close, it signifies more than the end of an administration; it heralds the demise of an era for the Democratic Party, once rooted in the liberal ideals of Roosevelt, Truman, and Kennedy. Despite Biden's reluctant embrace of progressive stances, he remains a relic of the party’s former identity—champions of the common man and economic upliftment.

Enter Kamala Harris, the harbinger of a fully transformed Democratic Party. This new iteration has shifted its focus from workers' rights and economic issues to the post-industrial concerns of California-style progressives: climate change, abortion, reparations, and trans advocacy. Harris, a product of both traditional femininity and feminist causes, embodies the ascendancy of identity politics. Her career, buoyed by her mixed-race background, exemplifies the party's pivot towards diversity and representation.

Harris's meteoric rise, bolstered by her heritage and her adept navigation of the political landscape, stands as a testament to the triumph of identity over substance. Her career, punctuated by her high-profile relationship with Willie Brown, is a narrative that, in a bygone era, might have been dismissed as tabloid fodder but now serves as a defining chapter in the party's evolution. Indeed, Harris's ascension to the vice presidency is a direct consequence of her identity politics, a stark departure from the meritocratic ideals once espoused by the party.

This shift in focus has left the blue-collar workers—the backbone of the traditional Democratic base—feeling abandoned. This alienation opened the door for Donald Trump in 2016, who capitalized on their discontent and may well do so again. Ronald Reagan once tapped into these voters with his message of economic revitalization and patriotic pride, but Bill Clinton managed to bring them back into the Democratic fold by emphasizing economic growth and opportunity.

Today’s Democratic Party, however, is enamored with identity politics, sidelining the economic concerns of these voters. Historically, Democrats garnered support by addressing fundamental economic concerns—housing, wages, and working conditions. However, today's base, comprising urban professionals and elites, prioritizes issues far removed from the everyday struggles of the working class. This disconnect is starkly evident in key battleground states like Arizona and Michigan, where working-class dissatisfaction with the Democratic economic agenda is palpable.

Minority voters, once reliable Democratic supporters, are now reconsidering their loyalties. Latinos, in particular, are gravitating towards the GOP, disenchanted by a party that increasingly overlooks their economic concerns. This trend is exacerbated by the Democrats' focus on progressive social issues, which often alienates those more concerned with economic stability and growth.

Harris, despite her symbolic resonance, may struggle to bridge this divide. Her progressive stances, particularly on law enforcement and climate regulation, clash with the priorities of many traditional Democratic voters. Moreover, her affiliation with California, a state grappling with economic and social challenges, may further hinder her appeal in the Midwest and other regions critical to a national campaign.

The Biden administration’s legacy complicates Harris's path. Despite lofty ambitions, the administration's economic policies have failed to significantly uplift the average American, with inflation outpacing income growth and small businesses facing unprecedented challenges. The disconnect between progressive policies and the realities of American life presents a formidable obstacle for Harris.

The Democrats' transformation under Harris signifies a departure from their historical mission. As Biden exits, he takes with him the last vestiges of a party once dedicated to economic upliftment and the common man. In its place stands a party reshaped by identity politics and progressive ideologies, a change that may well alienate its traditional base.

In abandoning blue-collar workers, the Democratic Party has inadvertently strengthened Trump’s hand. His 2016 victory was rooted in the disillusionment of these voters, and he may well harness their support again. The Reagan Democrats, who found solace in Clinton’s economic policies, now feel forsaken by a party that prioritizes social issues over economic stability.

As the nation approaches the next election, voters face a stark choice. The old Democratic Party, with its focus on economic growth and working-class concerns, may never return. This shift represents not just a political realignment but a profound change in the party's core identity—a change that may have lasting implications for American politics.

In the end, Kamala Harris's rise symbolizes the triumph of identity politics over substance, a transformation that has reshaped the Democratic Party beyond recognition. As voters head to the polls, they must decide whether this new iteration of the party truly represents their interests or whether it is merely a reflection of a fleeting political fad. Whatever the outcome, the old Democratic Party, with its roots in the New Deal and its focus on economic upliftment, is gone—and with it, a vital part of America's political heritage.