Now that the dust has settled after election night, I’m sure you were witness to the predictable reaction from both sides of the aisle. Mike Johnson was in unconvincing denial, and Trumple Thinskin was, well, what shall we say, as usual, making no sense at all. Meanwhile, Hakeem Jeffreys was, as I predicted, attempting to paint the picture that Democrats are back, when the reality is that the last polling data available four days before the election showed they had a favorability rating of 33.4% with an unfavorability rating of 59.4%. Economist/YouGov polls showed favourables at 34% and unfavorables at 64%. So any thought that these results marked a return of trust in the Democratic Party is fanciful to say the least.
I don’t make this point to bash Democrats, as I am often accused of doing; I make it because delusion in politics is fatal, and that’s what’s going on at the top of the Democratic Party in this moment of delusion. It’s in moments like these that we must look clear-eyed at the road ahead. In that respect, the only thing that changed on election day was that the American people were awake to exactly who Trump is and that he‘s doing the polar opposite of what he promised during the 2024 campaign. What Jeffreys and Schumer are doing is using a protest vote against Trump to misdirect people away from a leadership crisis, with a totally misleading claim that ‘Dems are back’.
The problem is as significant today as it ever was, and just as Trump is deceiving the American people, Democratic leadership is attempting to deceive their own base, and that, for me, is unacceptable. Indeed, if I were a gambling man, I would wager Schumer voted for Cuomo in New York, given his refusal to answer that question at a press conference. Neither Schumer nor Jeffries, despite both living in New York, attended celebrations for Mamdani’s victory, which sends a message of ignorance and an inability to read the room.
You may recall that in June, they both steered clear of the No King’s demonstrations when millions of Americans took to the streets to protest against Trump. Jeffreys and Schumer, along with many establishment Democrats, chose instead on that day to attend the wedding of Alex Soros (son of George Soros) and Huma Abedin. This was, at the time, a deliberate political move to distance themselves from the No Kings movement in case the protests turned violent.
While millions of Democratic activists were ensuring the voices of the people were heard, their leaders were living it up at a lavish soiree, as a cover in case their protest became violent. Take a moment to reflect on that. In stark contrast, they fully embraced the No Kings event in October because they saw it as a way to be seen supporting the very movement they had previously distanced themselves from. They felt it would show they were ‘with the people’. I’ll leave you to be the judge of what you think about that.
Don’t let the euphoria of the outstanding success of election day fool you into giving Democratic leadership a free pass for more of the same old same old. The American people are not stupid; they will not perceive a battle for the soul of the Democratic Party as a bad thing, despite what establishment Democrats would have you believe. A public fight, far from being damaging, if framed correctly, could be a way to engage the public in a way they have failed to do since the election, encouraging them to see how the struggle to rebuild a party for the people, by the people, and for the people is achieved.
This could help to engage the millions of disaffected voters who see all politicians as charlatans interested only in preserving the corrupt status quo of self-interest and enrichment. Unfortunately, this is the truth about how politicians are viewed. Currently, public trust is at a historic low. In 2024, it was around 22%. In 2025, it will no doubt have sunk further, but this data is not yet available. The problem is, few people trust ANY politician, and this is a situation of their own making.
Right now, everyone is looking for a silver bullet to fix the problem. The truth of the matter is that building trust takes years, sometimes decades, and can be lost in an instant. The American people have reached the point where it no longer exists in either party. I’m a big fan of historical context when examining issues like trust —not just in politics, but also in institutions like law enforcement and those very relevant to this moment, for example, the Supreme Court, where trust has sunk to a historic low (rightfully, in my view). To bring a broader historical context to this conversation, I urge you to read this excellent piece by Guardian reporter Madeleine Aggeler, from June 11th 2024.
This is all part of a much larger collapse, which, in my view, is why 90 million Americans have disengaged from the process altogether. What you have to remember is that once trust is lost, it opens the door for malign actors like Trump to gain power, because the fewer people who participate in the process, the fewer votes are needed to gain control of the government. In Trump’s case, he won the election with the votes of around 32% of eligible voters. He won the national popular vote with a plurality of 49.8%, so even among those who actually voted, he did not gain a majority, yet he claims to have a mandate. It’s just another one of his fantasy narratives.
We could have a whole separate conversation about the Electoral College, but that’s probably a discussion best left for another day. If we accept, as we should, that the Dems are NOT back, then the problem that existed before the election remains unchanged. With this in mind, Democrats have to convince the American people that they are worthy of their support beyond being a refuge for Trump protest votes. This requires a radical fix. I contend that, in a world dominated by social media and sound bites, this fix needs to emerge from a very public fight for the soul of the party. Anyone on the inside who’s trying to convince you that Dems should do their dirty washing behind closed doors is wrong and is likely the very source of the current trust deficit.
What I am about to suggest is pretty radical, but try to stay with me until the end, because I’m one of the few people trying to write about plausible solutions to a mission-critical problem. This is much more than a Democratic Party problem; it’s a Democracy problem. I’m going to share the first part of my solution with you today because I think it will probably take an additional post to cover it all. If you laugh me off the stage with this first part, you probably will arrange to throw me in a mental health facility for the remainder.
Before I begin, I want to assure you that I have given this a lot of thought, because I’m acutely aware of how outside the box this may appear at first glance. One thing we know about modern-day politics is that it’s no longer something that goes on behind closed doors, although some of the most dangerous and sinister acts are clearly still the preserve of these activities. What I want to focus on is the public face of politics, which dominates today's conversation.
From an information flow perspective, the communication teams from all political parties and associated supporting entities, are in a daily battle to control the narrative. Trump is now in pole position to dominate because he has both social and corporate media on a leash and, by default, broadly under his control. From a visual messaging perspective, we learned a lot from the recent election, not least that a top-notch comms team can tap into voter demographics as Mamdani did with young voters in New York. Without question, this can be a formidable political weapon.
With all the dark money spent against him and even the lack of support from his own party machinery, nobody could stop Mamdani from being elected, and we must understand this key point. Ultimately, the people hold the power unless you remove their constitutional right to vote. Something that Trump is working very hard to do.
It’s the combination of bold colours and the clever use of less formal fonts that is a subtle yet critical design element, creating a powerful brand image. Let’s be clear, though, the branding was merely complementary to the solid ‘Affordability’ message that his campaign sold so well. Also, do not for a moment dismiss how much the AOC brand experience contributed to his campaign, along with sociopolitical messaging elements that came from ideas long espoused by Bernie Sanders. For me, it was a masterclass in top-drawer political campaigning. A highly motivated grassroots army of believers knocked on three million doors. Despite this, many within his own party denied him their support. One biblical phrase that springs to mind is ‘Father, forgive them for they know not what they do’.
I’m telling you right here, right now, that the reason Democrats are below a 20% trust level with the American people is because self-preservation and self-enrichment are tragically systemic and now woven into the fabric of the Democratic Party. I’m happy to be the one to say it out loud, because until someone does, there will be no progress toward a more equitable society in America.
The very reason Mamdani is an outcast in his own party is that he dared to believe people deserve much better from their politicians. He was prepared to step forward and say so, just as AOC did in 2018. Seven years later, despite her repeatedly proving herself to be one of the most effective political operators in Congress, she is still regarded as a threat to the party—indeed a danger to Chuck Schumer’s seat in the Senate.
There will be readers who say, ‘You’re living in a dream world, Martin, ’ in the real world, it doesn’t work like that. To which I say, if you don’t have the audacity of ambition, then why are you in politics? The sad answer to that question is, all too often, to make money — and as much of it as possible. I have said over and over that I believe in capitalism, it’s the only system to date that has proved to bring wider benefit from economic growth and prosperity. It’s not the principle of capitalism that’s the problem; it’s deregulated capitalism, or ‘Wild West capitalism’ as I prefer to call it, that transforms the wealth gap into a social chasm.
While this may not be a popular statement, I believe politicians should be paid more, and second homes for accommodation while in office and reasonable expenses should be included in a package that allows for the abolition of dark money, stock trading, and the nonsense that corporations should be treated as people for the purpose of free speech. Politics has become so corrupt that legislators have become little more than a front for a network of corporate influence, with corporations serving as the real lawmakers. The legislators they have bought are merely ventriloquist dummies manipulated to do their bidding.
Let’s not deceive ourselves: buying influence in politics is as old as humanity, and there is no way to remove it. But what you must not do is pass laws that literally give it license to become part of the legislative process, as was facilitated with Citizens United. It seems to me that, time and time again, all roads lead to the Supreme Court as they rule in favour of corporate interests at the expense of the people they swore an oath to protect. There is little doubt in my mind that any court prepared to place a population at the mercy of a tyrant serving at the altar of greed and cruelty, should take a long hard look in a mirror and ask themselves who they are really serving, because it’s not the people.
Having listened to the entire oral arguments for Trump’s justification of plenary authority to use tariffs in order to steal money from Americans, I felt mildly encouraged that even the conservative majority seemed sceptical, as rightly they should be, given that the authority should remain with Congress. However, time and again, we saw indications that the likes of Alito and even Justice Roberts were attempting to bend the argument to justify allowing Trump to do as he pleases. We are now living in a world, I’m afraid, where the highest court in the land is bending over backwards in service of a convicted criminal—hardly the hallmark of a global beacon of democracy.
Why is all this relevant to the point I'm trying to make? It’s absolutely possible to chart a new course, but to do so, the Democratic Party needs a reset to deliver a new people-focused vision, free of the shackles of special interests. The only winner in any US election right now is corporate America, which, it seems, owns the majority of politicians.
I realise I’m a nobody when it comes to strategic political thinking in America. I’ll be the first to admit that my writing is hardly ever crowd-pleasing. However, I can guarantee it is based on detailed research and a deep understanding of the political and legal framework on which US society is built. I am nothing if not a pragmatic, objective observer. As an outsider, I don’t come to my conclusions bringing with me any party political baggage, only a set of common-sense values based on the belief that no child should go to bed hungry and no family should be left behind.
I hope to conclude this series of posts tomorrow, to cover everything I have to say on this important subject of a way forward, but rest assured, I will cover all the angles so you can better understand the opportunity this moment of peril presents.
I'm looking forward to catching up with you tomorrow to discuss the final steps in my thoughts on a solution.
Look at how the DNC treated David Hogg. He was elected vice chair. He advocated for replacing the "effective " politicians. They screamed "again". Well, we all remember Feinstein sleeping through hearings. I hope they heed your messages. Business as usual will not defeat fascism.
you’re not wrong. while I vehemently oppose the Republican Party, I’m not OK with the Democrats thinking that going back to status quo is OK. Trump was a symptom of a problem. The AOCs, Crocketts, Hoggs and Mamdanis are the solution. If establishment Democrats remain in denial about that, there is no hope other than a momentary reactionary swing to the left that will then be battled by more corruption until it swings back to the right.