SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
jobs
Democrats, Call Them Names—But Do It Right
Rather than focusing on personal insults, Democrats should be using labels like “Pro-Cancer,” “Job-Killers,” “Anti-Constitution,” and “Healthcare-Cutters” to tar congressional Republicans.
Mar 30, 2025
Democratic politicians have begun trying to vent voters’ anger at their opponents by calling them names. Minnesota Gov. and former vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz recently called DOGE head Elon Musk a “South African nepo baby,” presenting him as an entitled foreigner. Similarly, U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett attracted attention by calling Texas Gov. Greg Abbott “Governor Hot Wheels.”
This name-calling may feel good for Democrats, but it just repeats the mistake of the recent past. Democrats lost the 2024 election due to their inordinate focus on President Donald Trump’s personal flaws, controversial statements, and criminal record as well as by offering a vague, bland policy agenda. What is needed now is a focus on policies—not personalities—though name-calling may still be a key tool, if they do it right.
Rather than focusing on the personal, Democrats should be using labels like “Pro-Cancer,” “Job-Killers,” “Anti-Constitution,” and “Healthcare-Cutters” to tar congressional Republicans. These may sound harsh, even outlandish. But they are true, highlighting in only a few words how Trump and Musk’s actions (and congressional acquiescence to them) will harm Americans in ways that matter to them.
The main objective right now should be not only hitting hard, but hitting smart—and saddling Republicans in Congress with the worst effects of Trump’s agenda using concise, aggressive terminology.
Only through a wave of sharp, crisp, and memorable verbal attacks on all Republicans to raise awareness of the most unpopular ill effects of Trump policies can Democrats force them to either distance themselves from the president or fully own his agenda. Think of the effectiveness of the Republican phrase “death panels,” a slanderous label used to describe the Affordable Care Act that helped contribute to the Democrats’ big loss in the 2010 midterms only two years after former President Barack Obama’s historic 2008 victory. Unlike “death panels,” labels like “Pro-Cancer,” “Anti-Constitution,” and “Job-Killers” have the benefit of being true.
Any Republican politician who has not vocally opposed Trump’s massive, multi-billion dollar National Institutes of Health cuts to institutions researching treatments for cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses should be label as “Pro-Cancer.” It is not unfair, it is a fact—if you are a politician weakening researchers’ ability to find cures and treatments for cancer, you are on the wrong side of the war against cancer. Opponents of Trump could theoretically form a broad base of opposition by forming local groups with names like “Cancer Survivors Against Cuts” to pressure Republicans in Congress to stand up and protect these funds. Even if the effort fails, as it likely will, these labels might prove potent against Republicans in 2026. This national issue can easily be framed locally given that every state has universities facing major cuts, and in many states and congressional districts, these universities and their health networks are among the top employers.
On that note, Democrats should be labeling Republicans as job killers, and not only because of the tens of thousands of federal workers Musk’s DOGE has fired, or because of the many jobs lost amid hiring freezes at universities (affecting whole university towns) and by businesses facing tariff uncertainty. Democrats can connect Musk’s interest in AI and self-driving cars to the fact that he and others in the Trump orbit, despite their ostensible opposition to job outsourcing, are more than happy to use technology to kill jobs. Job-killing congressional Republicans should be tied as closely as possible to Musk and anything unpopular about his business empire simply because of all they do to enable him.
To borrow a phrase used recently by Jamelle Bouie to characterize Trump’s policies, all Republican enablers of Trumpism should be considered “Anti-Constitutional” for supporting an assault on the separation of powers. Similarly, repeatedly calling congressional Republicans “Healthcare-Cutters” would call attention to the massive Medicaid cuts in next year’s budget and how they will affect regular people, which many Americans—including some who rely on Medicaid—seem to be unaware of amid these busy news cycles.
This name-calling may strike some as rude or radical. But being rude never seemed to hurt the Republicans, and right now, the danger for Democrats isn’t looking radical—it is looking weak. Moderates, and even some conservative voters, will have more respect for Democrats who are not feeble and can confidently call out Republican policies that will harm their lives. If they want to present themselves as more moderate, Democrats can frame themselves as “Anti-Recession Activists” and “Constitution Supporters.”
Many Democrats are refraining from going on the offensive, instead apparently waiting until enough conservative voters suffer from the economic pains of Trump’s policies. But the country cannot afford to wait. The main objective right now should be not only hitting hard, but hitting smart—and saddling Republicans in Congress with the worst effects of Trump’s agenda using concise, aggressive terminology. Democrats—liberals, progressives, moderates—are fighting for their way of life. It is time to act like it.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Dems Need a Clear Vision to Move Themselves—and the Country—Forward
A just transition for fossil fuel workers, a pro-worker AI strategy, and a pragmatic approach to global security could be the cornerstones of a compelling Democratic message.
Mar 23, 2025
People continue to observe that the political parties have at best a very limited if any vision or a frightening one at worst.
There are many things that people are worried about, but three issues sit in the back of voters’ minds—issues that will inevitably come to the fore and produce anxiety in the electorate. The first is the future of energy and the jobs tied to it. Many working-class Americans rely on fossil fuel jobs to support their families. They hear talk of green energy but wonder: What happens to us?
The term “just transition” is often used to address this concern, and experts like Jillian Neuberger and Devashree Saha, in their April 5, 2021, publication, have provided a roadmap for how it could be implemented. A just transition ensures that workers in fossil fuel industries are not left behind in the shift to renewable energy; rather, they are retrained and given new opportunities in clean energy sectors. This is a crucial conversation, but the Republicans continue to be in denial and the Democrats have not adequately articulated the idea to the public. Instead, they are allowing the perception to fester that climate action simply means job losses, without presenting a compelling case for how workers will be protected. The party needs to make it clear: Climate action does not mean economic devastation. Instead, it can be an opportunity to build a new, sustainable economy that works for everyone. But to do this, they need to communicate a clear vision—something they are failing to do.
The last presidential election sent a clear message: Americans are primarily concerned about their work, their financial security, and the future of their families.
Another widespread concern is the rise of artificial intelligence and its impact on jobs. Workers fear automation and AI replacing their livelihoods. This concern is not unfounded; many industries are already seeing jobs being replaced by machines and algorithms. Yet, there are solutions that could make AI work for, rather than against, the American worker. Economists Daron Acemoglu, David Autor, and Simon Johnson have written extensively about “pro-worker AI,” a model that emphasizes using artificial intelligence to complement human labor rather than replace it. The industries that stand to benefit the most from this approach include education and healthcare—sectors where AI can be leveraged to assist, not replace, workers. In education, AI can provide personalized tutoring, help automate administrative tasks, and free teachers to focus more on student engagement and critical thinking. In healthcare, AI can aid doctors in diagnosing diseases more accurately, reduce paperwork for nurses, and streamline hospital operations, improving patient care without eliminating human oversight.
The Democrats should be leading on policies that ensure AI serves as an enhancement rather than a replacement for human workers. One way to accomplish this is through tax-code changes that incentivize hiring human labor over automation. Right now, businesses can often save money by replacing workers with machines because tax structures favor capital investment over labor costs. Changing this dynamic could encourage companies to keep employees in meaningful roles while integrating AI in a way that boosts productivity without sacrificing jobs. Additionally, as AI increasingly touches all aspects of government—from infrastructure planning to national security—there is an urgent need for AI expertise within federal agencies. Without knowledgeable oversight, policymakers risk falling behind in regulating AI’s impact, leaving critical decisions to private companies whose priorities may not align with the public good. A forward-thinking Democratic vision should prioritize hiring AI specialists within government to ensure that technology is developed and deployed responsibly.
Beyond domestic concerns, global instability is another major source of anxiety. Nine nations now have nuclear weapons, and the U.S. and Russia hold 90% of them. Meanwhile, China is currently on course to gain parity with the Big Two. This reality makes the threat of nuclear war or catastrophic accidents an ever-present concern. President Donald Trump recently questioned why the U.S. is spending exorbitantly on nuclear weapons, stating, “We have so many, so many, and we can’t use them.” (Reuters, February 13, 2025, Andrea Shalal and Steve Holland). This time, rather than opposing him reflexively, the Democrats should agree—and hold him to his words. Russia and China have already expressed willingness to engage in nuclear arms limitation talks. Instead of dismissing Trump’s remarks, Democrats should demand that he take the next step and follow through on negotiations. There is now a real pathway to reducing nuclear arsenals, and the Democrats should ensure that Trump and the GOP are held accountable for making it happen.
The last presidential election sent a clear message: Americans are primarily concerned about their work, their financial security, and the future of their families. While other issues matter, the fundamental well-being of the working and middle class remains the dominant force shaping electoral outcomes. If the Democrats fail to articulate a vision that speaks directly to these concerns, they will continue to be distrusted by many of the people they claim to champion.
There are answers to these challenges. A just transition for fossil fuel workers, a pro-worker AI strategy, and a pragmatic approach to global security could be the cornerstones of a compelling Democratic vision. But the party needs to do more than just hold these ideas in policy papers and academic discussions. They need to articulate them forcefully, repeatedly, and in a way that resonates with the American people.
If you don’t have a vision, you’re not going to get anywhere. Right now, the Democrats seem to be standing still. The question is: When will they start moving?
Keep ReadingShow Less
Data Shows 'Shocking' Consumer Sentiment Plunge as Trump Economic Chaos Takes Hold
"Bloodbath of a consumer sentiment print," said one policy expert. "People hate the Trump economy."
Mar 14, 2025
Data published Friday shows that U.S. consumer sentiment cratered in early March to its lowest level since late 2022 as President Donald Trump's erratic tariff policies and assault on the federal government—the nation's largest employer—spurred far-reaching economic chaos.
The University of Michigan's closely watched consumer confidence gauge shows that sentiment "slid another 11% this month, with declines seen consistently across all groups by age, education, income, wealth, political affiliations, and geographic regions."
"While current economic conditions were little changed, expectations for the future deteriorated across multiple facets of the economy, including personal finances, labor markets, inflation, business conditions, and stock markets," said Joanne Hsu, director of the university's Surveys of Consumers. "Many consumers cited the high level of uncertainty around policy and other economic factors; frequent gyrations in economic policies make it very difficult for consumers to plan for the future, regardless of one's policy preferences."
"Consumers from all three political affiliations are in agreement that the outlook has weakened since February," Hsu added. "Despite their greater confidence following the election, Republicans posted a sizable 10% decline in their expectations index in March. For Independents and Democrats, the expectations index declined an even steeper 12% and 24%, respectively."
The survey also found that consumer inflation expectations jumped to their highest level since November 2022, an indication that Americans are concerned about the impact that Trump's trade war will have on prices, which the president promised during his campaign to bring down.
Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collaborative, said in a statement that the "shocking consumer sentiment numbers are a referendum on the president’s mishandling of the economy, just 54 days into office."
"Working families are longing for stability as their grocery bills and rent payments continue to climb, but Trump's chaotic approach to the economy has them feeling more uncertain than ever," said Jacquez. "Consumers are rightly terrified about what lies ahead. The administration is more focused on gutting Social Security to pay for tax giveaways to billionaires and corporations than they are making life more affordable for working families."
The new consumer survey data comes a week after a Labor Department report showed that the U.S. added significantly fewer jobs than expected in February, which one economist described as "the calm before the storm" as the Trump administration fires tens of thousands of federal workers, fuels widespread unease and confusion with his tariff threats, and backs devastating cuts to Medicaid and other key programs.
"The administration seems determined to squander and wreck the strong economy," Josh Bivens, chief economist at the Economic Policy Institute, wrote earlier this week. "Each of the individual policies they are pursuing—illegal layoffs of federal workers, mass deportations, constant threats and retractions of broad-based tariffs, and Medicaid spending cuts—would be bad for the economy. But each policy is also being pursued with maximum levels of chaos and incoordination, creating unprecedented levels of economic uncertainty. This uncertainty is itself a serious economic threat."
"Absent a radical reversal of the current policy agenda, the U.S. will be a poorer country at the end of Trump's term than it should have been," Bivens added. "The only open question is how rapidly this de-growth will happen, whether more quickly through a sharp recession or more slowly as the supply destruction outpaces demand destruction."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular