ight after the midterm elections I wrote about John Fetterman’s Senate victory in Pennsylvania. It owed largely to his conviction to connect with non-college educated whites, who represent a huge 42% of all voters nationally—and even more in his state. These are people who many Democrats now presume are a lost cause; hopeless MAGAs firmly welded to the GOP. Fetterman disproved that. He went out to listen to these voters and simply presented his case. His approach worked and he won.

His strategy wasn’t exactly original. In fact, Joe Biden worked the same ropes to punch his way to the White House in 2020, and Sen. Rafael Warnock did the same in his Georgia runoff victory in December.

Now, to be sure, this is not a magic potion. Also working for Democrats in the midterms was an unintended election gift from the Supreme Court. After the justices overturned a half century of abortion rights, the voter outrage was palpable.

Which leaves some people musing, wouldn’t it be great if another galvanizing issue popped up to turbocharge voter turnout in 2024? No need to wait, it’s already here—if Democrats are smart enough to use it.

The issue is “economic inequality”; or, to put it more prosaically, people everywhere are sick and tired of being ripped off by the rich. And that includes almost everyone--all races, all geographies, all genders, all generations and all religions. The only souls not fuming are the very rich—which is the whole point.

How do we know inequality is getting worse?

First, it’s important to distinguish between the term income inequality and wealth inequality. The former is often stated as the salary of a CEO compared to the average pay of workers in his company. It’s not unimportant, but it’s also a distraction—not nearly close to the whole story. To tell that, you’ve also got to consider that CEO’s wealth—his bank account, his investment portfolio, his three expensive homes, and all the money his heiress wife inherited from her rich parents. It’s not about what the CEO “makes", it’s what he’s got. That starts to get at the truth of inequality.

The graph below shows how that wealth inequality has exploded since the “Great Recession” in 2008. The data points here are 2008; the beginning of the pandemic in 2020; and current day:

Before we move on, look again at the orange line on the bottom. That’s the total wealth for everyone in the entire lower half of Americans—about 168 million people--together.

Now look again at the green line above. That’s not a typo—and it’s not the top one percent. It’s the top one- tenth of one percent of all Americans. How many is that? Well, you could look at it this way: take away everybody in New York City and L.A. and Chicago and Dallas and Philly and Atlanta and everyone else in the whole damn country—except those who could fit in the town of Henderson, Nevada. That’s it. The wealth of these raptors in Henderson represents 17 trillion dollars. Seventeen trillion is more than everybody in England or Germany or France. And since 2008…through two recessions and a pandemic…the uber-rich saw their wealth jump by 13 trillion dollars! Thirteen TRILLION!

I’m going to pause here a second to compose myself……OK, now, let’s continue.

How do we know that people really realize this?

Because they tell us.

Pew Research asked respondents if there’s too much economic inequality. A lot of people never think about this, but 61% said yes. That includes 78% of Democrats. but more importantly, 41% of voters who are Republican or “lean Republican”. Those Republicans constitute a huge number, from 15%-20% of all voters. If even half are mad enough to turn their backs on the GOP, Democrats win easily.

On a separate question, people were asked if billionaires were good or bad for America. Depending on the subgroup, some 15%-25% said “bad”. But one group was much different. Among voters between 18 and 29, that “bad” number skyrocketed to 50%! Want to boost young voter turnout? Use this!

So, what should be done?

A Latino focus group respondent recently told podcaster Jon Favreau, “the Republicans are for the rich and the Democrats are for the poor, but who’s for the rest of us?”

Good god. This quote should be tattooed on the forehead of the Democratic party. It’s the siren song from the 42%--“hey, what about us!?” To the 42’s, Democrats have paid too much attention to “victims”: immigrants, the abjectly poor, the homeless, and all those on the wrong end of multiple forms of discrimination. That may sound harsh to you—but this exercise is about beating back the MAGAs, not winning moral arguments. This middle class is not unsympathetic to victims, but they see the federal budget as a zero-sum game—"what goes to someone else doesn’t go to me. How are you going to help me pay my rent or my medical bills…or get me more for my $50 at the grocery store?”

But how do you split the difference between the 42% and the “victims”? Below are the results of a Gallup poll from last summer. It asked specifically what remedies people favor to combat inequality:

If you squint, you can see a moral judgment peeking through these answers. The message (to me) is this: “those who are willing to work” deserve more help. Those who aren’t willing not so much.” Yeah, that’s a misguided attitude (to put it mildly), but there it is.

Note that these numbers are responses from all voters. A majority of Republicans support only the top step, boosting worker skills/training. To underscore GOP opinions, more than 40% of them say poor people are poor because they just work less. Now, you can spend time and passion trying to convince those Republicans about who deserves what. You can try to trigger their empathy. But do we really think that’s possible by 2024? Or even 2084?

OK, what does all this mean?

If the goal is to win votes from the 42% who are non-college educated whites, a fundamental strategy would seem to be not putting front-and-center economic promises and programs that target specified subgroups, i.e., ones targeting specific genders, races, class, or geographies. The 42% shows it is willing primarily to support those programs which promise relief and advancement to “all Americans.” That means things like infrastructure, good-paying jobs, vocational training, easier access to college, lower taxes, and efforts to cut prices. Or look at it this way: a hefty government subsidy to someone buying a $60,000 Tesla may provide environmental good. But it doesn’t have much relevance to a family making just $60,000 a year.

The other learning appears as #2 on the list above: pay for “all-American” programs with stiffer taxes on large corporations and the ultra-rich. Stick it to them! And that includes a sensible recalibration of the inheritance tax…treating capital gains realistically…and stopping the obscene government subsidies to those giant corporations—especially the ones who pay little or no taxes.

Fine, if all this is so obvious, why don’t Dems just go out and sell this stuff?

Here’s the dirty little secret. You know all those billionaires and titanic companies we want to tax aggressively? They happen to have enough coins in the cushions of their mansions and executive suites to easily buy enormous lobbying clout. It’s more than enough to ignore what the public demands. And unfortunately, this doesn’t just apply to the GOP; it also buys compliance from many Democrats.

The true test of loyalty to country and citizenry comes when elected officials decide to put aside non-stop election obsessions and just do the right thing. And only the people can do that. The irony here is that by doing the right thing, they can actually boost their chances of reelection. Imagine that.

Three final thoughts.

President Lyndon Johnson, a lifelong champion of civil rights, once put this modern conflict of campaign issues in the most pragmatic of sentiments: “What good is …(protesting) at the lunch counter to buy a cup of coffee…if you don’t have the 50 cents to buy it?”
In 2016, exit pollsters asked voters who cast their ballots for Donald Trump who their second choice would have been. Overwhelmingly, they said Bernie Sanders. What?!!—the MAGAs from the far right were also attracted to a socialist from the far left? Here’s the deal. The message from both was identical: “they system is screwing you over, and I’m here to fix it.” No matter that Trump was lying, and Bernie was sincere. The appeal to the 42% was undeniable. They’re telling you how to campaign.
Right now, 70% of all Americans say the economic system is tilted to the rich.

People clearly want fairness and pocketbook help.

I wonder if Democrats are smart enough to pay attention.

Issue 21

Slam Dunk: How Dems Win in ‘24