
Swing voters want more focus on the economy, less on identity issues
But by last fall, Teachey, an aircraft mechanic from Bucks County, Pennsylvania, was rethinking his political allegiances. To him, the Democratic Party seemed increasingly focused on issues of identity at the expense of more tangible day-to-day concerns, such as public safety or the economy.
'Some of them turned their back on their base,' Teachey, 54, said.
Raymond Teachey, an aircraft mechanic who said that he skipped the 2024 presidential election after supporting Joe Biden in 2020, at a park in Bristol, Pennsylvania. Photo / Hannah Yoon, The New York Times
Working-class voters like Teachey, who supported Biden in 2020 but either backed Trump last year or, as Teachey did, skipped the 2024 presidential election, help explain why Democrats lost pivotal swing counties like Bucks and vividly illustrate how the traditional Democratic coalition has eroded in the Trump era.
Now, Democrats hope to bring these voters back into the fold for the midterm elections in 2026, betting on a backlash to Trump and his party's far-reaching moves to slash the social safety net.
But in interviews with nearly 30 predominantly working-class voters who supported Biden in 2020 before defecting or struggling deeply with their choices last year, many had a stinging message for the Democratic Party.
Just because we have misgivings about Trump, they say, it doesn't mean we like you.
'I think I'm done with the Democrats,' said Desmond Smith, 24, a deli worker from Smithdale, Mississippi, and a black man who said he backed Biden in 2020 at the height of the racial justice protests.
Last year, disillusioned by what he saw as the party's over-emphasis on identity politics and concerned about illegal immigration, he voted for Trump.
Asked how Democrats could win him back, he said: 'Fight for Americans instead of fighting for everybody else'.
An in-depth post-election study from the Pew Research Centre suggests that about 5% of Biden's voters in 2020 switched to Trump in 2024, while roughly 15% of those voters stayed home last year.
Trump retained more of his 2020 voters than Democrats did, a crucial factor in winning the election.
Polling on the current attitudes of those Biden defectors is limited, but it is clear the Democratic brand, broadly, continues to struggle.
A Wall Street Journal poll released in late July found that the party's image was at its lowest point in more than three decades, with just 33% of voters saying they held a favourable view of Democrats.
'They're doing nothing to move their own numbers because they don't have an economic message,' said John Anzalone, a veteran Democratic pollster who worked on that survey.
'They think that this is about Trump's numbers getting worse,' he added. 'They need to worry about their numbers.'
Certainly, anger with Trump, an energised Democratic base and the headwinds a president's party typically confronts in Midterm elections could help propel Democrats to victory next year.
Democrats have had some recruitment success (and luck), and they see growing openings to argue that Trump's domestic agenda helps the wealthy at the expense of the working class, a message they are already beginning to push in advertising.
There is no top-of-the-ticket national Democrat to defend or avoid, while Republicans have virtually no room to distance themselves from Trump's least popular ideas.
But interviews with the voters whom Democrats are most desperate to reclaim also suggest that the party's challenges could extend well beyond next year's races.
Here are five takeaways from those conversations.
Biden's disastrous re-election bid fuelled a trust issue. It hasn't gone away.
Bielski, 35, an executive chef at a private club, said he had typically voted for Democrats until last year's presidential election, when he backed Trump.
Democratic leaders had insisted that the plainly frail Biden was vigorous enough to run, and they had encouraged sceptical voters to fall in line. Instantly after he dropped out, they urged Democrats to unite behind the candidacy of Kamala Harris, who was then the vice-president.
That did not sit right with Bielski, who said he was already distrustful of Democrats who had pushed pandemic-era lockdowns. Harris, he said, 'wasn't someone that I got to vote for in a primary'.
'It almost seemed wrong,' continued Bielski, who lives in Phoenix. 'It was kind of like, okay, the same people that were just running the country are now telling us that this is the person that we should vote for.'
After Harris became the Democratic nominee, some voters interpreted her meandering answers in televised interviews as an unwillingness to be straight with them.
By contrast, while Trump gave outlandish and rambling public remarks riddled with conspiracy theories and lies, some said they had got the general sense that he wanted to tackle the cost of living and curb illegal immigration.
'It was difficult to understand what her point of view was,' said Bruce Gamble, 67, a retired substation maintainer for the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority.
Gamble said he voted for Biden in 2020 and Trump last year.
Trump 'was able to communicate better to me', he added, while Harris 'felt like she was talking over my head, so I didn't quite trust her'.
Worried about paying the bills, they saw Democrats as too focused on cultural issues.
Many in this multiracial group of voters said they thought Democrats had gone too far in promoting transgender rights or in emphasising matters of racial identity.
But often, they were more bothered by their perception that those discussions had come at the expense of addressing economic anxieties.
'It seemed like they were more concerned with DEI and LGBTQ issues and really just things that didn't pertain to me or concern me at all,' said Kendall Wood, 32, a truck driver from Henrico County, Virginia.
He said he voted for Trump last year after backing Biden in 2020. 'They weren't concerned with, really, kitchen-table issues.'
A poll from the New York Times and Ipsos conducted this year found that many Americans did not believe that the Democratic Party was focused on the economic issues that mattered most to them.
'Maybe talk about real-world problems,' said Maya Garcia, 23, a restaurant server from the San Fernando Valley in California. She said she voted for Biden in 2020 and did not vote for president last year. Democrats talk 'a lot about us emotionally, but what are we going to do financially?'
She added, 'I understand that you want, you know, equal rights and things like that. But I feel like we need to talk more about the economics.'
But in a warning sign for Republicans, a recent CNN poll found that a growing share of Americans — 63% — felt as if Trump had not paid enough attention to the country's most important problems.
Sarah Smarty, a home health aide and an author who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 but flipped to President Donald Trump last year, drives through Mifflin County, near McClure, Pennsylvania. Photo / Hannah Yoon, The New York Times
'America First' gained new resonance amid wars abroad.
As wars raged in the Middle East and Ukraine, some working-class voters thought the Biden Administration cared more about events abroad than about the problems in their communities.
'They were funding in other countries, while we do not have the money to fund ourselves,' said Smarty, 33, a home health aide and an author.
She said she voted for Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2024, adding that she viewed Trump as a man of action.
'I would really like to see more jobs,' she said. 'I would like to see them take good care of people who are homeless in our area.'
Bielski said that against the backdrop of overseas turmoil, Trump's 'America First' message resonated.
But these days, he does not think Trump is living up to that mantra.
'We're getting into more stuff abroad and not really focusing on economics here,' he said.
'It doesn't seem like he's holding true to anything that he's promised.'
Flores, 22, a technician at a car dealership, said the foreign policy emphasis — and a sense that life was tough regardless of the party in power — helped explain why he skipped last year's election as well as the 2020 presidential race.
'No matter how many times have we gone red, or even blue, the blue-collar workers' have seen little progress, Flores said.
Marlon Flores, a technician at a car dealership who said that regardless of the party in power, blue-collar workers have seen little progress, at his apartment complex in Houston. Photo / Desiree Rios, The New York Times
They worry about illegal immigration. But some think Trump's crackdowns are going too far.
These voters often said they agreed with Trump on the need to stem the flow of illegal immigration and strengthen border security.
But some worried about the Administration's crackdown, which has resulted in sweeping raids, children being separated from their parents, the deportation of American citizens and a growing sense of fear in immigrant communities.
Several people interviewed said they knew people who had been personally affected.
Smarty, for instance, said her friend's husband, who had lived in the US for 25 years, had suddenly been deported to Mexico.
Her friend is 'going through some health problems, and they have kids, and that's really hard on their family', Smarty said. 'I don't really feel that's exactly right.'
They're not done with every Democrat. But they're tired of the old guard.
Many of the voters interviewed said they remained open to supporting Democrats — or at least the younger ones.
'Stop being friggin' old,' said Cinnamon Boffa, 57, from Langhorne, Pennsylvania.
As she recalled, she supported Biden in 2020 but voted only down-ballot last year, lamenting that 'our choices suck'.
Teachey thought there was still room for seasoned politicians, but in many cases, it was time to get 'the boomers out of there'.
He is increasingly inclined to support Democrats next year to check unfettered Republican power.
'They're totally far-right,' he said of the GOP. 'Honestly, I don't identify with any party.'
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Written by: Katie Glueck
Photographs by: Adriana Zehbrauskas, Hannah Yoon, Desiree Rios
©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Otago Daily Times
29 minutes ago
- Otago Daily Times
European leaders to back Ukraine in Trump talks
European leaders will join Volodymyr Zelenskyy to meet Donald Trump in Washington, they said today, seeking to shore up Zelenskyy's position as the US president presses Ukraine to accept a quick peace deal to end Europe's deadliest war in 80 years. Trump is leaning on Zelenskyy to strike an agreement after he met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska and emerged more aligned with Moscow on seeking a peace deal instead of a ceasefire first. Trump and Zelenskyy will meet tomorrow. It is expected that they will have a bilateral meeting prior to the European leaders joining a larger conversation, according to a person briefed on the conversation. The White House did not respond to a request for comment on scheduling details. "If peace is not going to be possible here and this is just going to continue on as a war, people will continue to die by the thousands ... we may unfortunately wind up there, but we don't want to wind up there," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in an interview with CBS' Face the Nation . Trump discussed Ukraine in several social media posts today. In one, he promised "BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA" in a social media post without specifying what this might be. In another, he said Zelenskyy could end the war "almost immediately, if he wants to" and seemed to indicate that reclaiming Crimea and joining NATO are off the table for Ukraine. In a post on his Truth Social social media, Trump said: "Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!" Sources briefed on Moscow's thinking told Reuters the US and Russian leaders have discussed proposals for Russia to relinquish tiny pockets of occupied Ukraine in exchange for Kyiv ceding a swathe of fortified land in the east and freezing the front lines elsewhere. Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia's envoy to international organizations in Vienna, said Russia agreed that any peace agreement on Ukraine must provide security guarantees to Kyiv. "Many leaders of #EU states emphasize that a future peace agreement should provide reliable security assurances or guarantees for Ukraine," Ulyanov said on social media platform X. "Russia agrees with that. But it has equal right to expect that Moscow will also get efficient security guarantees." Top Trump officials hinted that the fate of Ukraine's eastern Donbas region - which is already mostly under Russian control - was on the line, while some sort of defensive pact was also on the table. "We were able to win the following concession, that the United States could offer Article 5-like protection," Trump envoy Steve Witkoff told CNN's State of the Union today, suggesting this would be in lieu of Ukraine seeking NATO membership. He said it was "the first time we had ever heard the Russians agree to that". Article 5 of NATO's founding treaty enshrines the principle of collective defense, in which an attack on any member is considered an attack on all. That pledge may not be enough to sway Kyiv to sign over Donbas. Ukraine's borders were already meant to be guaranteed when Ukraine surrendered a nuclear arsenal in 1994, which proved to be little deterrent when Russia absorbed Crimea in 2014 and launched its full-scale invasion in 2022. The war has killed or wounded more than 1 million people. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer hosted a meeting of allies today to bolster Zelenskyy's hand, hoping in particular to lock down robust security guarantees for Ukraine that would include a US role. The Europeans are eager to help Zelenskyy avoid a repeat of his last Oval Office meeting in February when Trump and Vice President JD Vance gave the Ukrainian leader a public dressing-down, accusing him of being ungrateful and disrespectful. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will also travel to Washington, as will Finnish President Alexander Stubb, who has played rounds of golf with Trump this year, and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, an admirer of many Trump policies. EUROPEAN SHOW OF UNITY European leaders at the today meeting projected unity, welcoming US talk of a security guarantee but stressing no discussions over territory could take place without Kyiv's involvement and clear arrangements to safeguard the rest of Ukraine's land. Some called for an immediate ceasefire, which Trump originally said he was trying to secure during his summit with Putin. Trump later changed course and agreed with the Russians that peace negotiations could come without a ceasefire, an idea dismissed by some of Ukraine's European allies. "You cannot negotiate peace under falling bombs," Poland's foreign ministry said in a statement. A joint communique released by Britain, France and Germany after the meeting said their leaders were ready "to deploy a reassurance force once hostilities have ceased, and to help secure Ukraine's skies and seas and regenerate Ukraine's armed forces". Some European countries, led by Britain and France, have been working since last year on such a plan, but others in the region remain reluctant to become involved militarily. Zelenskyy said on X there had been "clear support for Ukraine's independence and sovereignty" at the meeting. "Everyone agrees that borders must not be changed by force." He said any prospective security guarantees "must really be very practical, delivering protection on land, in the air, and at sea, and must be developed with Europe's participation". Rubio said both Russia and Ukraine would need to make concessions to reach a peace deal and security guarantees for Ukraine would be discussed on Monday. He also said there must be additional consequences for Russia if no deal was reached. "I'm not saying we're on the verge of a peace deal, but I am saying that we saw movement, enough movement to justify a follow-up meeting with Zelenskyy and the Europeans, enough movement for us to dedicate even more time to this," Rubio told broadcaster CBS. Putin briefed his close ally, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, about the Alaska talks, and also spoke with Kazakhstan's president, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. Trump said on Friday Ukraine should make a deal to end the war because "Russia is a very big power, and they're not." After the Alaska summit, Trump phoned Zelenskyy and told him the Kremlin chief had offered to freeze most front lines if Ukraine ceded all of Donetsk, a source familiar with the matter said. Zelenskyy rejected the demand.


NZ Herald
29 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
MetService National Weather August 18-19
NZ Herald Morning News Update | Trump and Putin meet in Alaska, Darts in Auckland Trump and Putin are meeting in Alaska this morning to hopefully discuss peace and a ceasefire deal for Ukraine. Ukraine is not present at the meeting and was not invited.

RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Hawaiian conservationists win legal battle to protect marine sanctuary
Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument is an area spanning more than 1.2 million square kilometers of ocean. Photo: USFWS A court in Hawai'i has tossed a federal directive allowing commercial fishing in protected Pacific waters, in defiance of orders from the White House. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issued a notice on April 2025 authorising commercial fishing within the , an area spanning more than 1.2 million square kilometers of ocean. This notice was pursuant to an executive order from US President Donald Trump, titled "Unleashing American Commercial Fishing in the Pacific", that dismantled fishing protections in certain parts of the monument. Since the NMFS letter was issued, commercial fishing operations quickly began in waters between 50 and 200 nautical miles around Johnston Atoll, Jarvis Island, and Wake Island. The action was met with a lawsuit backed by campaign group Earthjustice, on behalf of a group of Hawaiian conservation groups. More than four months later, the US District Court in Hawai'i gave them their first victory , voiding the letter and thus the legal right for commercial fishers. The court asserted that the government had not gone through the correct legal processes, and that the public had not been consulted. Among the groups making up the plaintiffs for the case was the Kapa'a community, a group of Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners from the island of Kaua'i. One of their founding members, Solomon Pili Kaho'ohalahala, has been a prominent environmental activist for decades. His community call him "Uncle Sol". He told RNZ Pacific that this was personal. "When [President Trump] made that announcement, he made no provisions for the care and protection of resources for the generations of children that are going to be the ones to inherit this place." "For me personally, that is an insult to our marine cultural protection as indigenous people, that look at the care for generations, to ensure that our children's children's children will have a place to help to take care of them in their time." Seeing this, he approached Earthjustice's David Henkin, a Honolulu-based lawyer who became the lead attorney. Henkin believes that President Trump's use of the Antiquities Act, which is the statute that President Barack Obama originally used to establish the monument, would open the door to the White House crashing any protected marine area they wanted. "If President Trump were to get away with it and undo protections within a monument, this very important tool for protecting important lands and marine waters for future generations would be taken away. "They cannot lawfully destroy the monument and the ecosystems inside of it." Henkin said that when the NMFS directive was issued, fishing vessels flooded in within hours, according to their tracking efforts. "On April the 27th, two days after the letter came out, the first Hawaii-based long line commercial fishing operations started happening in the monument." According to , as of 12 August, fishing vessels have all but vacated the monument expansion area. Kahoʻohalahala said that indigenous rights were falling victim to Trump's rhetorical belief that the United States needs to dominate in all things. "Evidently the colonizer, the United no support for our generational view and protection of resources, and in fact has now tried to say we want to extract everything we can, because we want to be the biggest and the best." "That is unacceptable to me as a native Hawaiian." Earthjustice filed their lawsuit in May, which centred challenging President Trump's authority to dismantle protections under the Antiquities Act. The order effectively usurped the need for such a move to go through Congress, Henkin said. In June, Henkin motioned for summary judgment, or a ruling without trial, to section out and specifically address the NMFS letter. They argued that NMFS had not followed the rules set out in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, requiring public notice and consultation before any changes to fishing regulations. The court granted the motion. In ruling, Judge Micah W.J. Smith said that fishing operations could not lean on that letter as legal protection to fish in the monument. "The letter did not merely suggest that NMFS would decline to enforce its existing regulations banning commercial fishing there. Instead, the letter took the position that those regulations no longer exist." Judge Smith noted that the NMFS relied on Trump's order in place of existing regulations, which was unlawful in its premise. Further, the plaintiffs argued that their cultural rights and interests in the monument, which is steeped in heritage and ecological importance for the Hawaiian people, were harmed. Judge Smith acknowledge that a "procedural injury" had been caused by the NMFS letter and the executive order, as the plaintiffs had cultural, spiritual, and scientific interests in the monument expansion area. Henkin said there is still work to be done. "I'd say it set a very strong and important precedent for the NMFS that they can't cut corners in that way." "The next steps will be to meet with the court - there's a scheduling conference on 6 October, when we'll be talking about what the schedule will be for resolving those Antiquities Act claims and any other claims that may present themselves."