David Inoue
For many people, approximately half the voting population, Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2024, was an incredibly traumatic experience. President-elect Donald Trump will serve a second term, despite the many frightening and threatening things he said throughout his campaign targeting immigrants, transgender people and anyone in general who has disagreed with him.
And yet, more than half of the voters, both in the electoral college and the national popular vote, found a reason, or perhaps many reasons, to vote for Mr. Trump. While there were clearly a significant number of Trump voters who support his rhetoric against immigrants and others, there were significant numbers who recognized the vileness of the rhetoric but were more responsive to campaign messages of candidates of the past such as President Ronald Reagan’s query, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”
As I stated in my pre-election column, we need to make the effort to genuinely get to know those who are voting in incredibly divergent ways from us. The demographics of race and ethnicity, gender identity, education and socioeconomic status are truly dividing us and preventing us from understanding one another.
With every announced administrative nomination from the president-elect, the fear only seems to grow as the recognition that many of the people promoting the fear of targeted groups and individuals will be at the levers of control in the government to act on the rhetoric.
This fear of what might come to be has many proclaiming that anyone who voted for Trump is now “dead to them.” The pain of personal identities and how they will be directly targeted has been painful. While Trump leveraged fear to mobilize his supporters, the fear has now transferred to the people targeted by the misinformation.
Yet, this dismissiveness of Trump voters is exactly what has led to the problem for progressives in reaching working-class voters. Perhaps the greatest divides of all are those of the differences in education and socioeconomic status. This divide blinds many to how serious the dire economic circumstances are for so many working-class Americans.
For so many people with higher incomes — who tended to be supportive of the Harris-Walz ticket — they have been more insulated from the extreme inflation that has characterized much of the past few years. That combined with higher levels of stock ownership, which has done very well, insulates higher-income individuals from the impacts of the cost of a dozen eggs or a gallon of milk.
At the macroeconomic level, the economy has been doing quite well this past year, baffling many pundits and reporters who felt that the strong economy would benefit the credibility of the Biden-Harris economy. But while the major economic indicators did well, the “average Joe” was hurting and not reaping the benefits of the hypercharged stock market or higher wages that were slower to trickle down.
It was not until the closing days of the electoral season that striking mechanics for Boeing were able to come to an agreement. While there were several other labor wins, there continue to be strikes across the country, especially in the service sectors.
We talk about how we want to support pro-middle-class economic policies, but too many people consider themselves part of the middle class, and it is often the people at the top of the class who benefit from those policies, whether they be student-loan forgiveness or first-time home-buyer credits. There are so many people who have no plans to go to college or are close to being able to purchase a first home.
So many of these people are the ones who did not see an economic answer from progressive policies and saw alignment with the idea that they were better off financially four years ago. Sadly, the actual proposals of candidate Trump will likely do little to advance the economic prospects of those most in need. Progressives must demonstrate that their policies truly will support and advance the interests of these voters.
Rather than reject and dismiss these voters in fear for their personal finances, we should acknowledge and recognize they are in need and that is creating a fear not unlike what many people are feeling from the new administration. Maybe going forward, we can all recognize that we do have something we share, and that is fear for what our future holds for us. Perhaps by working together, we can conquer these challenges.
David Inoue is based in the organization’s Washington, D.C., office.
