Democrats continue to point fingers over the reasons behind Donald Trump’s victory in the presidential election. Bernie Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont, believes that the Democratic Party’s disconnection from the economic struggles of working-class Americans is to blame.
He argues that it’s not surprising that a party which has turned its back on the working class finds that the working class has turned its back on them. However, this stance seems condescending for someone who positions himself as an advocate for workers’ rights.
Sanders suggests that Kamala Harris lost the election due to the Democrats’ failure to connect with the working class in a genuine way. But treating these voters like children who need constant reassurance undermines their agency. People deserve respect, but they should also be held accountable for the decisions they make.
Bernie Sanders attributes Trump’s success to the Democratic Party’s neglect of working-class concerns
The election wasn’t merely about policy issues; it revolved around core principles, and voters understood precisely what they were choosing. This election presented a clear distinction: one candidate pledged to uphold America’s founding ideals, democracy, and the rule of law, while the other played to populist grievances and promised to reduce grocery prices.
It’s demeaning to assume, as Sanders does, that working-class voters should be uninterested in the country’s democratic traditions. America’s early leaders were primarily self-taught farmers and tradespeople, with George Washington lacking formal education. Public debates, including the Federalist Papers, took place among ordinary citizens in everyday settings like coffeehouses and homes. The working class not only built America but helped form its intellectual foundation.
For much of U.S. history, these ideals remained intact. The generations that defended democracy in two world wars would have never supported a candidate like Donald Trump. They would have rejected him outright, making it inconceivable for him to be elected president.
Today, things have shifted. Voters chose an authoritarian leader because they were frustrated with rising costs, like the price of eggs. This isn’t a sustainable path. If the majority of Americans are willing to sacrifice democracy for fleeting economic security, then the core of the American experiment is in jeopardy.
Despite this, there may still be hope. While it’s true that voters had clear choices, it’s possible many didn’t fully comprehend the implications of their votes. Many might not have even made the effort to explore the facts.
A recent poll showed a stark contrast between perception and reality: despite two years of robust economic growth, 56% of voters believed the country was in a recession. Half of them wrongly thought unemployment was at a 50-year high, even though it was at a 50-year low. Similarly, half thought the stock market had been down for the year, despite a 25% increase.
This highlights the growing divide in America, with two distinct realities based on different sources of information. Why is this happening? While it’s possible for those dedicated to news consumption to seek out multiple sources online, most people rely on a limited set of outlets.
A study found that over half of Americans get their news from social media, and 20% of them follow influencers for their updates. Even traditional news outlets tailor content to please their audiences, turning news into entertainment rather than a straightforward presentation of facts.
For example, a viewer of Fox News will likely have a drastically different perspective than someone watching MSNBC. During the civil case where Donald Trump was found liable for sexually assaulting E. Jean Carroll, MSNBC covered it 440 times in the first five months of 2023, while Fox News mentioned it just seven times. This pattern of selective coverage extends to many other stories.
Historical context shows that working-class Americans have played a crucial role in shaping democracy
When Fox News does cover negative news about Trump, it’s often accompanied by attempts to downplay the situation. At times, the network has even resorted to outright lies to maintain ratings. Fox’s $787 million settlement over false claims about the 2020 election being stolen is a prime example.
In light of this, many voters, especially those in rural areas with limited news options, may be unaware of Trump’s actions and rhetoric. Data backs this up: just one in five voters knew that Trump had suggested he could suspend the Constitution due to his voter fraud claims in 2020. While this is a troubling reality, it also offers a chance for change.
If you voted for Donald Trump this November and were aware of his intentions to undermine the rule of law and democracy, you are part of the problem. A survey found that 25% of Republicans believed Trump should declare the 2024 election results invalid and do whatever it takes to remain in power.
This mindset is fundamentally un-American. No amount of patriotic symbols or rhetoric can conceal that those embracing this view are a threat to the nation’s core values. However, if you were simply confused or unaware of the implications of your vote, there may still be a path to redemption. If enough people come to recognize the gravity of the situation, there could still be hope that Trump’s victory won’t signify the end of the American experiment.
There’s no simple fix, especially considering that the freedom of the press is a pillar of American exceptionalism. The solution won’t be censorship. Yet, we must address this issue before it becomes irreversible. As the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, it’s possible to live in a country where everyone has different opinions.
But we cannot coexist in a nation where everyone has their own version of the facts. Chris Truax is an appellate attorney and served as Southern California chair for John McCain’s 2008 primary campaign.
