In an attempt to connect with the everyday American and shed their elitist image, some Democrats are scrambling to rebrand themselves. Apparently, the latest strategy involves dropping fancy, college-level words like “oligarchy” in favor of simpler concepts like opposing “kings.” It’s a move that seems more like a desperate gimmick than a genuine effort to resonate with the working-class folks they claim to represent. They suggest that to challenge the so-called “woke” Republicans, they need to channel some no-nonsense energy infused with a dash of loveable yet tough persona. This all sounds like the political equivalent of sticking a camouflage hat on a showroom mannequin and pretending it’s ready for a hunting expedition.
This convoluted effort at transformation feels much like an episode of a reality show where someone gets a complete makeover but forgets who they were in the first place. The problem lies not in the vocabulary but in the authenticity—or rather, the lack of it. People aren’t going to be swayed solely by a change in language if the substance of the message remains unchanged. Democrats who try to mimic Donald Trump’s direct approach and working-class appeal often seem to be dressed for the part but fall short when discussing policies that matter to those they wish to court.
The real issue isn’t just about whether “oligarchy” is a word that lands well on the ears of people in Ohio or Michigan. It’s about the Democrats’ legacy of failing to support policies that benefit the working class. Take Alyssa Slotkin, for example. She’s allegedly trying to adopt this new approach, but just wearing camo and talking family values doesn’t cut it. She’s against initiatives like the tariff war, which makes her sound out of tune with working-class Michiganders who back Trump’s stance as a way of fighting the nationwide industrial decline.
Slotkin and her fellow Democrats seem to misunderstand that you can’t just dress the part and expect everyone to believe you’re the real deal. The people can see through the façade; they know when someone is genuinely on their side and when they’re just playing dress-up to gain votes. While Slotkin tries to argue against naming the rich and powerful as oligarchs, what she really misses is the underlying desire of her constituents for actions, not words. The Democratic Party’s tendency to parade around in faux populism doesn’t mask their lack of concrete, beneficial actions for the blue-collar sectors they claim to champion.
All in all, the Democrats’ latest rebranding feels like remixing a tired political song and expecting a new generation to dance along. The whole don’t-use-oligarchy-use-kings spiel smacks of coastal intellectualism poorly disguised as folksy wisdom. Until they demonstrate a genuine commitment to the working-class values they’re so eager to emulate, they might find they have fewer and fewer willing dance partners in middle America.
