Pennsylvania and the Next Great Populism Shift

As a new age of Liberalism takes root, Populism will shift accordingly, with Pennsylvania leading the way

Republicans have successfully co-opted “populism” over the last few decades, which has helped them stay competitive in national elections, as suburban voters and overall demographics shift towards the Democrats’ favor. Populism can have many different meanings to many different people, but it’s reasonable to think of populism as favoring and catering to – even if only rhetorically – “ordinary people”. For the purposes of this article, “populism” can be defined as a reasonably angry and anti-elitist sentiment among blue collar workers, those who don’t have college degrees, and those of lower-to-middle class economic status.

Populism was a safe electoral space for the Democratic party during the last dominant Liberal era from the 1930s-1970s, as they tended to be the champion of unions and lower-income working-class voters. But for reasons that I won’t fully explore here, Democrats have been gradually losing ground with this voting bloc during the dominant Conservative era of 1980s-2010s, while Republicans have been winning them over. Interestingly, it should be noted that the share of non-voters among this bloc has been rising as well during this shift, indicating a more disaffected voting bloc.  (See my previous article The Political Stages of Drunkenness for explanation and analysis of the cycle of ideological eras).

This has been especially pronounced since 2010, with Republicans gaining 12 points among blue collar workers, and Democrats losing 8 points. The bottom line is “regular people” have been shifting strongly towards Republicans in recent years. This is despite the fact that Democrats tend to have more favorable policies for “regular people” than Republicans do, at least on paper.

So what can Democrats do to win them back? Well, they likely are already starting to. Maybe some answers lie in Pennsylvania, where populists Democrats John Fetterman won a Senate seat and Josh Shapiro won the Governorship due to winning over blue collar workers again. Both of these Democrats gained ground in working-class blue collar regions Trump had won handily in 2016. Granted, the Republican candidates were not particularly strong, with one being an alt-right nationalist and the other an elitist quasi-resident (if that) of the state. But this cannot discount the impressive totality of the victories.

If Democrats pay attention to these two Pennsylvanians and learn from them, they will realize that they can definitely take populism back from Republicans. Not the kind of violent revolutionary populism that is frenetically consuming much of the right-wing political ecosphere these days, but a sort of populism characterized by a newfound faith in government and hopefulness among regular folks. 

If Democrats play their cards right, it can potentially be something that helps restore some faith in government institutions again, after an era of Conservatism sought to erode that faith.

Talking to People and Getting Things Done

There have been many journalistic accounts of the campaign that Shapiro ran on his way to a landslide victory. They sum up that he was energetically campaigning everywhere in the state, talking to everyone he possibly could, including in Republican strongholds. Even though he was the frontrunner through all of the campaigning time period, he never shied away from the spotlight. He was media-centric and media-savvy.

After winning the election, there have been concrete examples of Shapiro actually “getting things done” (a favorite of populists), not just making fiery speeches or verbally promoting legislative agendas.  

Shapiro’s first executive order was to update state government job requirements, so that 92% of them would not require a 4-year college degree. This opened the door for a lot of people without college degrees to get into higher quality and better-paying jobs than otherwise available. Not only does this help increase their living standards, but it will likely help woo people from the Republican populist side to the Democrat populist side in future elections.

On June 11th, 2023 an accident involving a tanker truck did significant damage to the major Interstate Highway I-95 in the Northeast outskirts of Philadelphia, effectively shutting down a very important route for commerce in this area and other areas surrounding it. The fact that no one is still writing about this is not because of a media or populace with short attention spans; it’s because the highway literally was fixed and functional again in less than 2 weeks. This is nothing short of a government-works miracle, led by Governor Shapiro.

Then, on September 18, it was announced that Pennsylvania will start allowing for automatic voter registration when someone obtains or renews a Driver’s License in the state. Of course most Republicans are not in favor of this rule, but it is a very popular policy, with 24 states currently employing this system, and about 60% of the population favoring it, according to recent polls. Regular people like it to be easier to vote, so that less of their time and energy can be spent on this important, but somewhat mundane, task.

These are generally populist policies and actions that tend to belie frustrating government arrogance and inefficiency, that the “regular person” can and will benefit from greatly.

Standing up for What’s Right and Anti-elitism

Senator John Fetterman is a different type of person than Shapiro, but similar in that he inarguably comes off as someone on the side of the “regular person”. A uniquely-built tattoo-bearing tall man with consistently unique facial hair, along with his signature sweat-hoodie and shorts attire, he has the look of a common man, not a Senator. But it’s not just Fetterman’s appearance, although that is turning out to become very controversial. He also seems to be pretty dang principled.

When New Jersey Democratic Senator Bob Menendez was recently indicted for a second time on charges of bribery and corruption, Fetterman was the first Senator, Democrat or Republican, to be on the record asking for his resignation. With other Democrats wavering a bit at first, and at their harshest saying that due process should play out or that the NJ voters should ultimately decide, Fetterman’s position stands out as being particularly principled and outspoken. 

It was done so quickly, it’s hard to determine how much political calculations even played into it. One wonders if he’s angering Senate leadership, or if they are calculating that he has an important political image to uphold, or if they have very little control or influence over him. Regardless, as of this writing there are currently 31 Democratic Senators that are calling for Menendez to resign, with Fetterman leading the way, and even calling for his expulsion.

With this knee-jerk moral stance, he has appealed to regular folks with an anti-elitist attitude toward his own colleagues, which is very much in vogue these days among the populace. This is something that has made MAGA’s version of populism appealing to people (until recently, of course): standing up to the entrenched elite when it behaves badly. But Fetterman’s version is without the insults and bombastic immaturity.

Then there was the “Dress Code” scandal. To cater to Fetterman’s unusual personal dress style, Schumer altered the Senate’s dress code accordingly. This created a small firestorm among all sides about “respect” for the Senate and “decorum” within democratic institutions.

Steve Schmidt, the former Republican political advisor and current writer and podcaster, had a recent podcast episode that was focused on this issue, and he was blistering in his criticism of Schumer and Fetterman. I follow Steve and respect him greatly; his knowledge and appreciation of history and politics is among the best in the business. But I disagree with him here.

Actually, normally I would agree with him. If we were in a different political era, I would proudly proclaim that the institutions of our democracy should be respected and defended, and there should be high standards for the dress code in the Capitol and all aspects of the government, state and federal.

But this also stubbornly ignores those who we can’t afford to ignore anymore. The reality is we currently have a powerful strain of populism rising up among the people, partially created by increasing disparities between the haves and have-nots. Where do we want that energy to be unleashed? So far, it’s been trending towards nihilistic and often violent MAGA anti-establishment sentiment. Why not embrace it and allow it to be redirected towards more progressive ideologies with more moderate temperaments?  

Since the initial dress code alteration, the Senate held a vote and the old code was upheld, so Fetterman is required again to wear proper attire. But this issue was effective as a rallying cry for the common citizen.

Embrace the Inevitable Ideological Shift

If MAGA is not so much an ideology, but a big violent “Screw You” to the establishment, let’s encourage this sentiment to be manifested instead through Fetterman’s dress code defiance, quirky personality, and anti-corruption ethics; and through Shapiro’s “regular guy”-oriented legislation and efficiently effective executive action.

In the hands of MAGA, these qualities have become dark and ominous. In the hands of a new generation of energetic forward-looking Democrats, these qualities can be transformed into hopeful and encouraging progress for most of our more downtrodden citizens.

In Shapiro and Fetterman, Pennsylvania holds the key to the future for Democrats and populist progressivism. I believe that we are on the verge of an era where liberalism will be the dominant ideology (again, see my previous article The Stages of Political Drunkenness). The sooner the national Democratic Party embraces this and all that comes with it, including the emergent populism of today, the more smoothly and effectively they will successfully govern during their era of power.