“How the Democrats lost the working-class vote”, ran the headline on the New York Times’s front page on 6 January. According to the Times, the Democrats’ estrangement from the working class was decades in the making. The party’s enthusiastic embrace of trade and globalization led to the closure of factories across industrial America, eliminating jobs that had been a prime source of stability, identity and prestige.

While many Democrats attributed Trump’s success to the left’s embrace of “woke” language and causes like transgender rights, the Times observed, the economic seeds of his victories “were sown long ago”. A longtime AFL-CIO official was quoted as saying that “one of the things that has been frustrating about the narrative ‘the Democrats are losing the working class’ is that people are noticing it half a century after it happened”.

Given the long incubation of this development, one might say the Times itself was late in recognizing it. But the question remains: how can Democrats win back those working-class voters?

One key question has dominated: should the party move to the left or tack toward the center? Should it stress progressivism or moderation? In a way, though, it’s a false choice. The Democrats could combine both approaches in a policy of pragmatic populism, fusing the insurgent ideas and galvanizing fire of an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez with the plainspoken bread-and-butter appeal of a Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, an auto-repair shop owner who represents a rural district in Washington state.

Pragmatic populism would offer sweeping solutions to the economic anxiety facing so many American families but without the polarizing rhetoric. It would avoid labels like “oligarch” and “tycoon”, drop references to socialism and redistribution and refrain from saying that billionaires should not exist........

© The Guardian