FuturePAF
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
The individual efforts are trying to coalesce into pushing the party to rebuild a platform, that draws voters in the middle towards them.
You are right it about the economy, before it is about anything else. But considering how much Trump has created disasters effecting the economy; tariffs and the Iran war as just two examples, saying you want to have the power of the purse back in the hands of those who will not just rubber stamp Trump is appealing to some independents.
Dems can have a platform; “Invest in America and its future”. Focus on making housing affordable again, by getting interest rates down (and the issues that feed into that) as well as incentivize building. Then there is healthcare, an issue that comes up as a top priority; helping people get their coverage back that many lost in the past year under Trump’s actions regarding Obamacare. More jobs for childcare and elder care workers can help ease the burden on people sandwiched between taking take of their parents and their kids.
With the push for data centers before there is enough electricity to support them, Dems could push for a requirement data companies build small modular nuclear reactors and connect them to the grid to offset the burden. Dems could also push more regulation of flock cameras, and more regulation to oversee ICE.
Furthermore, it’s these non-establishment Dems that can break from party orthodoxy and advocate for stronger ways to employ national power to bring about a solution to the Middle East impasse, which is draining national resources to contain, and allowing China to leapfrog us to parity in key technologies and global influence. For example, some one like El-Sayed could advocate for solving the upstream problems in the Middle East and Latin America, to mitigate the root causes of the migrant crisis to Europe and the US, respectively.
Dems could advocate for being more lower end factories to Latin America (friend shoring), from places like China or Vietnam, and stabilizing the region economically, and apply pressure to uphold human rights and good governance; so that migration feels less like a necessity.
The platform is there. Dems just need enthusiastic and believable advocates to carry the message to the voters. Candidates supported by corporations (corporate dems) don’t seem believable as willing to regulate these large companies, especially in tech.
Ever since the tea party came out of a response to the Obama years, the electorate has been waiting for a democratic counter-response. This seems to be the year:
The key factors for Dems converting any gains in ‘26 into a presidential win in ‘28, is appearing as the party pushing improvements to affordability and quality of life without appearing as the party stoking disorder; so this new dem party will be trying to contain any new BLM protests; trying to have issues resolved quickly with better police-community relations. More funding for mental health and substance abuse rehabilitation to get homeless reduced. Basically, Dems will be following the Mamdani mayoral leadership, but could also be incentizing industry to make things Americans can afford again such as simple affordable pickups and crossovers. Get American industry locally and globally competitive in more industries.
With Bill Clinton and NAFTA, and Obama with more of the same, we saw the Midwest get shafted. Trump won over the Midwest promising reinvestment but never held investors to their word. Look at Hong campaigning in Wisconsin in front of the failed Foxconn plant.
Last edited:
