IF DEMOCRATS TAKE STRONG ECONOMIC STANDS, THEY CAN STOP BEING DEFINED BY THEIR ENEMIES

There's a good op-ed in The New York Times right now. It's written by a historian named Timothy Shenk, and it appears under the surprising-for-the-Times headline "Democrats Are in Crisis. Eat-the-Rich Populism Is the Only Answer." Shenk considers the campaigns of two candidates. One is Dan Osborn, an independent who came close to beating an incumbent Republican senator, Deb Fischer, in blood-red Nebraska last year, and who's now running for Nebraska's other Senate seat. The other is Zohran Mamdani, who's on track to be elected mayor of New York in November.

Shenk writes:

In 2024, while Donald Trump demolished Kamala Harris by 20 points, Mr. Osborn lost by just 7. According to the analytics website Split Ticket, this was the strongest performance relative to the partisan fundamentals of any Senate candidate.

What was Mr. Osborn’s secret? ... he was a credible spokesman for a message that resonated with voters in Nebraska — a blistering assault on economic elites, a moderate stance on cultural issues and the rejection of politics as usual.

Now, think about the biggest story of the 2025 election season, Zohran Mamdani’s come-from-nowhere victory in the New York City mayoral primary. From the start, Mr. Mamdani positioned himself as a fresh face confronting a dysfunctional system on behalf of ordinary New Yorkers struggling to pay their bills. He’s the happy class warrior blessed with Andrew Cuomo as his foil, a convenient stand-in for a corrupt and clueless establishment.

Shenk's conclusion:

It’s a simple recipe, really: a scorching economic message delivered by political outsiders standing up to the powerful. The villains in this narrative — and it’s essential to have villains — are the elites at the top of a broken system.... [Osborn and Mamdani] tell a story that reframes the debate, enlisting voters in a battle between the many and the few, with stakes that reach into everyday life.

I want Democrats (and others) to pursue eat-the-rich politics because it's the right thing to do -- the rich have too damn much money, and everyone else is struggling. But Shenk is right to say that this is also good politics, though I'm not sure we agree exactly on why. He writes, somewhat sneeringly:

There’s no mistaking Mr. Osborn for a typical Democrat. He regularly appears in shirtsleeves and jeans on the campaign trail, looking like he’s taking a break from fixing Pete Buttigieg’s Subaru.

Elsewhere, Shenk writes about another candidate who wants to win a Senate seat currently held by a Republican:

“I want to tear the Democratic Party down and build it back up from the studs,” said Nathan Sage, a self-described “child of a trailer park” running for the Senate in Iowa.

But Mamdani doesn't fit that profile at all. Shenk writes:

Mr. Mamdani and Mr. Osborn might not seem like they have much, or anything, in common — the child of an award-winning director and an Ivy League professor; the other a college dropout turned labor leader.

Osborn's usual attire is work shirts and worn denim, but Mamdani wears suits -- it's hard to imagine him repairing anyone's Subaru. And yet his opponents haven't succeeded in making the elitism charge stick (though Eric Adams and the Murdoch press sure tried).

It's not just because New York City is more white-collar than Nebraska. It's because Mamdani has taken big, bold stands. When you do that, you become known as The Guy Who Wants to Freeze the Rent and Make the Buses Free. You make your image, not the haters. They can try to use Fox News stereotypes on you, but if your positions are memorable, that's what people will remember about you.

Shenk tells us,

Neither Mr. Mamdani nor Mr. Osborn dwelled on cultural issues; instead, they concentrated on subjects like increasing wages and affording a home.

But Mamdani has been open about his LGBTQ allyship. A couple of months ago, he appeared on a web series answering gay trivia questions.



Mam,dani has said that "New York City must be a refuge for LGBTQIA+ people" and pleadged $65 million for trans healthcare. And yet he's not seen as a candidate who's stressing cultural issues because his economic message is bold.

Shenk doesn't mention Graham Platner, an insurgent Senate candidate in Maine who's a military veteran and an oysterman, and who's also denouncing the oligarchy.

My name is Graham Platner and I’m running for US Senate to defeat Susan Collins and topple the oligarchy that’s destroying our country. I’m a veteran, oysterman, and working class Mainer who’s seen this state become unlivable for working people. And that makes me deeply angry.

[image or embed]

— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine.bsky.social) August 19, 2025 at 8:37 AM

While Platner doesn't "dwell on cultural issues," he hasn't shied away from the them when asked about them. Just the opposite:

On LGBTQIA+ rights, Platner made one of his most pointed responses: “I stand right in the f***ing way of anyone who’s going to try to come after the freedoms of the LGBTQIA+ community.”

He's running for the seat currently held by Susan Collins. He says that “Susan Collins is a tool of the billionaire class,” adding, “We ALL agree we’re all getting f***ed by the system.” When that's your main message, that's what people will remember about you. You define yourself; they can try running an ad against you saying you're "for they/them," rather than "for us," but even some transphobes will ignore it because they see you primarily as a person who wants to fight for "us."

Establishment Democrats don't want to take bold stances, which leaves them vulnerable: if they don't say anything memorable about themselves or their positions, opponents will choose a hot-button issue and make that what voters remember about them. To some extent, that's what happened to Kamala Harris, and it's what's happening to the party in general. People think Democrats care only about cultural issues because most Democrats have no memorable positions on other issues. That leaves their enemies free to portray them as caring more about pronouns than grocery bills. But if you take a strong stand on issues that matter to everyone, you can also take strong stands on cultural issues. More Democrats need to recognize this.