From “The Path to Victory in 2026 — a Popular, Populist Agenda That Delivers for Working People” by Rep. Greg Cesar at Data for Progress: “In the wake of Donald Trump’s return to the White House, Democrats are once again searching for a message that can win back working-class voters, mobilize our base, and unify our party. Many Americans — especially non-college-educated voters and those outside major cities — still don’t feel like either party has their back. The question is: How do we earn their trust again?…New polling from Data for Progress points to a clear answer. A bold economic message — focused on holding billionaires accountable, cracking down on corporate greed, fighting political corruption, and delivering real, economic wins for working people — significantly outperforms a more traditional Democratic message centered on “defending the rule of law” and “promoting opportunity.” In the polling, a Democratic candidate running on this bold, populist message beats a Republican by 15 points — compared to just 6 points for a candidate running on the kind of generic messaging traditional Democratic consultants default to. That’s a 9-point boost — not from ideological purity, but from clarity and conviction…And this approach has support beyond Democratic voters. Across party lines, income levels, and education levels, bold economic populism inspires Americans — especially among the working-class voters we need most….Over the last few election cycles, Democrats have continued to lose credibility with American workers. And in 2026, we have an opportunity to rebuild trust — if we lead with a populist economic vision that’s as clear as it is popular. We see a progressive, populist Democrat leading a Republican candidate with non-college voters by 9 points, while a generic Democrat loses by 2. This strategy does not hinge on chasing specific voter demographics or compromising our core values as a party.’

“We must reclaim our identity as the party of working people,” Rep. Cesar adds “the Americans left behind while billionaires and special interests rig the rules of our politics and our economy…The agenda tested in this new polling is a commonsense roadmap for action. It includes cracking down on corporate price fixing, eliminating hidden junk fees, lowering the cost of prescription drugs, expanding Medicare benefits, and ending political corruption…Each of these ideas polls well with voters across the political spectrum, among Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike. Majorities of voters with household incomes under $50,000 and voters without a college degree are strongly supportive of this agenda. But more importantly, this agenda shows that voters will support Democrats if we fight clearly for our voters and against special interests. This approach directly names the villains that Americans understand are rigging the system: corrupt politicians, price-gouging corporations, and billionaires hoarding wealth while working families fall further behind…The lesson is simple: When we name our opponents clearly — corruption, soaring costs, and concentrated wealth — and show how we’ll deliver for everyday Americans, we win…That’s why this polling should be a wake-up call — not just for progressives, but for the whole Democratic party.  We don’t need to copy Republican efforts to divide working Americans. We need to be the party that lowers costs, fights corruption, and takes on the billionaires of all political stripes…This is a chance to realign our party with working people across race and across geography — to turn a crisis of trust into a coalition for change. We should take it.”

In “The Eternal Social Justice Summer: A much-maligned new book asks a fair question: Why do the excesses of the left offend voters more than those of the right?,” Richard D. Kahlenberg writes at The Washington Monthly: “It is precisely because Donald Trump is wreaking havoc daily that it’s crucial to comprehend why so many of our fellow Americans came to dislike the Democrats even more than the unlikable and chaotic man they elected president. How is it that a November 2024 survey of working-class Americans found that 58 percent believed Democrats have moved “too far left,”  a share that is 11 points higher than the share that believed Republicans have moved “too far right” (47 percent)?…A healthy concern about racial equality, particularly among white elites, morphed into an unbalanced focus that many Americans, including many Americans of color, found alienating on a host of issues…When the issue of racial preferences came before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 in a case involving Harvard University, the Biden administration arguably prioritized the interests of upper-middle-class Black and Hispanic families over working Americans of all races.  Harvard’s system of large racial preferences and legacy preferences worked well for economically advantaged students of all races. More than 70 percent of Black and Hispanic students came from the richest 20 percent of the Black and Hispanic families nationally, and the white and Asian students were even richer. Rather than backing a system of affirmative action for economically disadvantaged students of all races, however, Biden backed Harvard.”…After the 2024 election, liberals, who were fixated on race, puzzled over how on earth Trump could appeal to an increasing share of nonwhite voters, yielding what Williams calls “the least racially polarized election since 1972.” But to Williams, the result is not surprising. For nonwhite working-class voters, issues of racial reckoning didn’t touch their most pressing concerns, which centered around economic well-being. The “racial reckoning” of 2020, he writes, became “a professional-class affair, existing on another plane entirely from working-class reality.”…It is also possible that the extremism on the right is less difficult for working-class voters to stomach because it doesn’t come with the same strong sense of moral condescension that progressive activists (many of them economically well off) exude.”…Going forward, if Democrats want to win back America’s working class, they need to frame the necessary work of addressing race as a subset of the larger set of challenges facing working people across racial lines. They should emphasize race-neutral policies that serve all Americans who struggle, including working-class whites and underprivileged minorities alike. Such policies could include, for example, boosting funding for regional public and community colleges, as the Monthly’s Paul Glastris has argued…Pundits have pointed to many factors that contributed to Trump’s 2024 election—with inflation and immigration looming large—but cultural disconnect also played an important role.”

Re Trump’s latest big economic proposal – companies ending quarterly reports and just have semi-annual reports because it would “save money, and allow managers to focus on properly running their companies” – Does anyone out there suspect that he is proposing such a reform because he is anticipating a lot of disastrous quarterly reports coming in, as a result of his tariffs? If so, know that you are not alone. The way it is now, the SEC requires quarterly earnings reports. But that could soon be changed. It’s not a new idea. Long before Trump proposed such a change, his 2016 election opponent Hillary Clinton, along with Warren Buffet and Jamie Dimon proposed such a change, as Matt Egan reports at CNN Business. Nor is it a such bad idea. Egan explains, “The concern is that Corporate America is often far too focused on pleasing the notoriously fickle stock market and not paying enough attention to longer-term challenges and opportunities. Moreover, some argue that the regulatory burdens of quarterly reporting have contributed significantly to the sharp decline in the number of public companies in the United States.” Further, “In the 2010s, regulators in both the European Union and the United Kingdom stopped requiring companies to report quarterly results, moving to six-month reporting periods instead.” All off a sudden, Trump likes ideas originating with liberal Democrats and business leaders. The merits of the idea notwithstanding, it may be another indication that Trump expects some really bad economic news sooner, than later.”