Toward a New Blue Coalition to defeat Trump

Trump’s Victory and the Dissolution of the Obama Coalition

Trump's victory and the disintegration of the Obama coalition are inseparable.

After 2012, the Democratic Party lost the white non-college vote permanently. They lost the male vote, the non-white non-college vote, and, notably, Trump’s Republican Party made significant inroads with young voters, especially young men. Trump also gained ground among African-Americans, particularly among non-college-educated men, as well as among Hispanic voters, especially those who were non-college-educated and male. This represents nothing less than the formation of a new political coalition.

On the other hand, the Democratic Party solidified its grip on college-educated voters, became the party of women, and made significant inroads with more affluent suburban voters who had migrated from the Republican Party.

As a result, the Democratic Party has transformed into a more Caucasian, more female, more educated, and more suburban party. It is now stronger in urban centers, affluent suburbs, and exurbs, winning the areas populated by the urban poor, the professional-managerial class, and upper-middle-class suburbanites. Although Democrats still dominate in predominantly Hispanic and African-American districts, their margins have significantly diminished.

The Democratic Party now depends on lower turnout rates because its base is increasingly made up of high-propensity voters. Meanwhile, Trump’s coalition relies on low-propensity, low-information voters, many of whom are drawn to his populist rhetoric.

However, upper-middle-class suburban voters are not a reliable, solidly blue constituency. They lean purple and are far from fully onboard with “progressivism.” While many still vote Republican—especially in red states like Texas and Florida—in states like California and New York, they tend to support Democrats.

This is not a winning coalition for the Democrats. It’s a recipe for catastrophe, one that could lead to an unprecedented loss in the 2026 midterms unless the party changes its policy agenda and political identity.

An objective yet uninformed observer might ask how it is possible for Americans to elect someone as controversial and unpopular as Trump. The answer is straightforward: It is because the Democratic Party, as it stands, is even more unpopular and controversial in the eyes of a growing number of American voters.

What Can Be Done?
The Democrats must make inroads with non-college-educated voters—not just among Black, Hispanic, or white non-college voters, but across the spectrum of the non-college demographic. At the same time, they must accommodate suburban voters. These high-propensity voters in swing states—particularly in Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Florida—could easily switch allegiance to the opposition, neutralizing any gains among non-college voters.

To achieve this, the Democratic Party must discard three major images:

I. The party of the professional-managerial class
II. The party of women
III. The party of paternalistic elites who claim to speak for racial minorities

The Democratic Party needs candidates who can communicate effectively with men and craft a new, pro-masculinity message. To reconnect with white non-college voters, particularly in the less affluent suburbs of the Midwest, the Rust Belt, and rural middle America, the party must moderate its cultural tone. It needs to become, at the very least, more culturally conservative.

This means talking passionately about topics like big-engine cars, private homeownership, low taxes, guns, faith, and patriotism—and doing so authentically. This cannot be a superficial or symbolic shift. It must be credible.

The Democratic Party also needs to move away from identity politics and corporate-driven climate policies that primarily benefit the wealthy. Abortion, as a key issue, is unlikely to win over swing voters, so it should not be used as a central point of attack.

Additionally, Democrats should avoid criticizing Republicans on abstract, distant issues. For low-propensity voters and many Republicans, abstract debates about democracy or “rule of law” in 2024 have little resonance. More importantly, the Democrats were perceived as less democratic by a significant portion of the electorate. If 50% of the country sees the Democratic Party as hypocritical—not just Trump’s base—it’s no surprise that non-college voters flocked to the Republicans in droves.

Perception of hypocrisy can be mitigated if the core message resonates with voters on tangible, everyday issues like the economy. The Democrats failed to offer such a message, while Trump did.

Effective Criticism of Republicans
If Democrats choose to attack Republicans on issues like rule of law, corruption, or constitutional rights, the critique must be clear, relatable, and simple. The focus should be on specific illegal or radical actions that average Americans would find appalling—such as blatant corruption. Messages should be personalized, highlighting individual or family stories of how Trump’s policies have harmed their liberal rights. Appealing to collective empathy for victims of Trump’s policies could still work, but it must be done with emotional and factual credibility.

The Power of Moderate and Conservative Cultural Positions
By adopting more moderate or even conservative cultural positions, Democrats could accomplish several things at once. It would help them connect with men, white non-college voters, black non-college voters, Hispanic non-college voters, and even affluent, moderate suburbanites.

Who would be skeptical of this change? Urban voters, particularly women, members of the professional-managerial class, and college-educated voters. But these groups are already largely aligned with the Democratic Party. They have no viable third-party option, and their opposition to cultural shifts is more ideological than electoral.

It cannot be emphasized enough: much of what Trump sells to his base resonates broadly across America. What progressives promote in places like Seattle, South LA, and the Bronx holds little appeal to the wider electorate. As a result, Democrats find themselves at a disadvantage and will have to moderate their positions more than Republicans. Life, as they say, is unfair.

Economic Strategy: Return to Roots
Economically, the Democrats must return to their roots—healthcare, for example. While reinvigorating Medicaid should be a central rallying cry, this should not translate into advocating for a single-payer, universal healthcare system. Rather, it should focus on more healthcare spending for the lower-middle class, funded by slightly higher taxes on the highest income brackets.

Democrats must also embrace capitalism. This means deregulation and implementing a pro-growth, low-cost strategy. It would involve permitting and zoning reforms, as well as removing bottlenecks that hinder innovation, small business growth, and affordable living. A pro-deregulation, low-tax, and tariff-liberalization platform should be at the forefront of the party’s economic agenda.

Additionally, Democrats should embrace working immigrants and advocate for their right to move freely across the country, rather than being concentrated in specific areas because they claim asylum. Democrats need to be vocal about controlled borders, rejecting unlimited asylum claims as a pathway for unchecked immigration. At the same time, they should support legal immigration for individuals who are vetted, non-criminal, and willing to contribute to the economy.

These reforms would likely find support from non-college voters and affluent, moderate suburbanites alike.

Conclusion
Who would oppose these reforms? Primarily urban progressives. But these voters are already aligned with the Democrats, and they don’t have a viable alternative.

Democrats must recognize that much of Trump’s appeal goes beyond his core base. If they wish to remain competitive, they need to moderate their cultural and economic positions. This may be an uncomfortable reality, but it’s necessary if they hope to reclaim a broader, more diverse coalition in American politics.