This essay was originally published by The Edge at The Park Center for Independent Media.
A recent HuffPost headline captured the mood of Democrats after Trump’s 2024 election victory: “Shell-Shocked Democrats Stumbling For Answers After Loss To Donald Trump.” Similar reactions reverberated across major corporate media outlets. CNN reported, “Still-stunned Democrats begin to squint toward their future,” while NBC noted Democrats were trying to figure out “What Went Wrong?” The headlines were in response to Donald Trump’s seemingly impressive victory over Vice President Kamala Harris, a win that saw the Republican Party take control of the Presidency, House of Representatives, and U.S. Senate while also securing the popular vote (something no Republican has done since 2004) and seeing notable gains among women and voters of color.
Despite nearly a decade of negative press from Democratic Party-friendly establishment news outlets, Trump is now somehow more popular than he has ever been. This outcome has stunned Democrats. Telegraph’s Michael Lind explained that “Shocked Democrats thought they’d create a permanent majority. This election proved them wrong.” The Atlantic noted that Democrats lost because they were “delusional.” As in 2016, Team Blue leaning establishment news media must take their share of responsibility for putting Democratic Party voters in such a delusional state about the nature of this year’s presidential race.
Instead, many of these outlets and other Democratic apologists are going to their usual scapegoats — President Joe Biden, racism, sexism, far left protests, fake news, Russiagate, and podcasters — have all been cited as reasons for the defeat. However, it’s worth noting the old adage: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Democratic Party-leaning media led voters to believe they had a solid chance in a tight race, only for the party’s candidate to be decisively defeated. Democratic voters should consider moving beyond media outlets that cater to their confirmation biases to instead seek out independent sources that provide the unvarnished, factually supported truth.
Though many Democrats were shocked by the outcome of the election, there were those, including this writer, who saw Harris’ loss as inevitable. For example, Senator Bernie Sanders, who has long warned that Democrats risk losing the multiracial working class if they don’t adopt a pro-worker agenda, saw the outcome as “no great surprise.” Trump’s appeal to multiracial working-class voters played a significant role in his victory, an element Democratic media outlets consistently downplayed.
For many of those relying on outlets like MSNBC, the New York Times, and the Washington Post, Trump’s victory came as a surprise. These audiences had been bombarded with coverage of Trump’s felony charges and convictions, sexual assault allegations and convictions, repeated racist and sexist remarks, and his role in the January 6th insurrection — all framed as reasons he was unfit for office (and they wouldn’t be wrong). However, these same media outlets often ignored the groundswell of working-class support shifting toward Trump — including from people of color — or when not overlooking them, sought to shame these voters (black men in particular) instead of creating an agenda that would attract them to the Democratic Party. More liberal leaning news media outlets didn’t pick up on this shift because it didn’t align with the narrative that Democrats are a multiracial party more committed to working people and democracy than Republicans.
Scholars dispute the party’s commitment to democracy. In fact, many argue that the Democratic Party’s neoliberal ideology, focused on neutralizing the left and securing big donor funding, can paradoxically enable the rise of right-wing authoritarianism by alienating working-class voters. This isn’t to say that the Republican Party is more democratic, after all the new president-elect has yet to concede the 2020 election, but it does raise questions about the Democratic Party’s own inconsistencies regarding democratic processes given they chose to not have a real primary this election.
Meanwhile, right-wing media outlets like Fox News, OAN, Newsmax, and the digital programs in the so-called “manosphere” — such as the Joe Rogan Experience, Kill Tony, This Past Weekend, Impaulsive — highlighted stories that Democratic friendly outlets often ignored. These included the Democratic Party’s efforts to silence anyone who questioned Biden’s cognitive abilities until it became impossible for the party and their allies in the news media to conceal the reality of his declining state. Or their decision to skip a primary, which critics argued not only contradicted its democratic principles, but left Harris ill-prepared for a short and intense campaign. They also questioned whether Harris had thoroughly vetted her VP pick, Tim Walz, whose background was later marred by various controversies.
For Democrats disillusioned by this election’s outcome, it’s essential to break the cycle of relying on the same media that over and over assure them that the Democratic Party isn’t at fault — that it’s the voters, along with a grab bag of recycled boogiemen. Fortunately, there is an alternative media ecosystem known as the “dirtbag left” or the “prog-left,” which includes programs such as Breaking Points, Bad Faith Podcast, Young Turks, The Vanguard, and Katie Halper Show, that critique both major parties and offer a left-leaning perspective that’s more in tune with the concerns and needs of multiracial working-class voters. Indeed, unlike the legacy news media, the prog-left space has spent the last 100 or so days arguing that Harris needed to distance herself from Biden regarding Israel-Gaza if she hoped to have a shot at victory (post-election research indicates that this may have harmed Harris’ campaign in some key states). Audiences are in the digital space, and while the right has figured this out with the manosphere, liberals are still clinging to 60 Minutes and CNN’s Town Hall as the way to reach voters. By engaging with this new media, Democrats might develop a more populist and working-class-centered agenda.
The alternative is to stick with the traditional, hyper-partisan legacy news media outlets, which continue to promote the idea that the Democratic Party is fine as it is and that any faults lie elsewhere. This attitude gives Democratic voters an undeserved sense of moral superiority to judge others and avoid self-reflection. This not only turns off other prospective voters, but also leaves Democrats bewildered, with a smugness that acts to scold and alienate large swaths of the electorate.
Indeed, many Democrats, like the MAGA supporters they mock and deride, make calculations when they vote that overlook the struggles of other marginalized identities and communities. For example, Democrats may see Republicans as racist or sexist for not supporting a woman of color, yet some Arab Americans viewed Democrats as complicit in normalizing genocide in Gaza through their support of Harris, comprising a sizeable “uncommitted” voting bloc in key swing states. Similarly, each year both parties vote to fund in record amounts the Pentagon and U.S. military — the world’s largest polluter — raising the question: does this mean all Democratic and Republican voters are indifferent to the climate crisis? I am sure Democrats would respond that they do care about the climate, but other priorities took precedent this election year (like continued funding of Israel’s assaults on Gaza and neighboring countries when some three-quarters of Democratic voters called for an immediate ceasefire before Biden even stepped down). If so, they should be as charitable with those voters who made other calculations, especially ones around the economy, which has well-served the donor class and party elites at the expense of working people and the shrinking middle class.
If Democratic Party supporters truly want to see change, it’s time to heed diverse voices, broaden strategies beyond judging others, and avoid the mistake of repeating the same patterns in their media consumption.
Nolan Higdon is an author, lecturer at Merrill College and the Education Department at University of California, Santa Cruz, Project Censored National Judge, and founding member of the Critical Media Literacy Conference of the Americas. His work is available at Substack. Higdon is the author of The Anatomy of Fake News: A Critical News Literacy Education (2020); Let’s Agree to Disagree: A Critical Thinking Guide to Communication, Conflict Management, and Critical Media Literacy (2022); and The Media And Me: A Guide To Critical Media Literacy For Young People (2022). He is a regular source of expertise on media issues and current political events for CBS, NBC, The New York Times, and The San Francisco Chronicle.
Is progressive politics dead in California? Experts weigh in By Lisa Fernandez (November 12, 2024): KTVU spoke to University of California at Santa Cruz history professor Nolan Higdon; Vinod Aggarwal, a distinguished political science professor and Alann P. Bedford Endowed chair at UC Berkeley, Saint Mary's College of California Provost Corey Cook, who is also a political science professor, and KTVU Political Analyst Brian Sobel.
Did I miss something Mr Higdon? You declare Democrats need to pay more attention to non- corporate media and yet you are "a regular source of expertise on media issues and current political events for CBS NBC The New York times and the San Francisco chronicle". Maybe you need to relocate your pulpit as well.