Russian writer Fyodor Dostovesky wrote “I say let the world go to hell, but I should always have my tea.” Well, the last sixish years of American politics have felt as such, and yet, as I sit here with my proverbial tea I find it remarkable how uninspired the Democratic reaction to President Donald Trump has been. I mean, as the walls of our democracy are torn down they decide it is advantageous to court San Francisco socialites that vote nine out of 10 times for Dems instead of trying to win back the voters lost in 2016 and 2020 to Trump? Maybe I’m not being clear enough: Dems have forgotten about rural America, and it will cost them.

Take the 206 counties, the vast majority rural, that voted for President Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, but for President Donald Trump in 2016. Of those 206 counties President Joe Biden was only able to flip 25 to Trump’s 181 in the 2020 election. One could extract myriad theories from such a statistic, but it doesn’t change the fact that Biden has been unable to draw rural votes. This begs the question: is he really trying to win rural votes?

Sure Biden stumped for Unions in 2020, and continues to support unionization efforts, but he has also done little to address concerns amongst rural voters. They worry about government spending as the Biden administration allows the child tax credit for couples earning upwards of $400,000. With turnover higher amongst rural teachers Biden has created new and onerous stipulations for teachers to work. Inflation too has hurt poor rural areas harder than urban areas, as the consumer price index rose month to month despite the government’s hope that falling oil prices would ease inflationary pressures. This is less the direct impact of the Biden administration, but it certainly doesn’t help as midterms loom. 

At the congressional level, despite the House of Representatives being deeply gerrymandered, there still exist 30 odd competitive districts where Dems could win rural votes if they backed centrist candidates from the area. One in particular, Maine’s Second Congressional District is of interest, as it meets all of these conditions. Incumbent Congressman Jared Golden (D), class of ‘11, squares off against former Congressman Bruce Poliquin (R). In a district that voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020, Golden has managed to win. A Marine that served in Afghanistan and Iraq, he opposes outright bans of “assault” rifles and is “pro-choice.” What makes Golden the perfect candidate, is that he sees himself as representative first and foremost, not an appendage of the Democratic party. In a district where people are deeply skeptical of the government his leadership is far more akin to allyship. The Democratic party ought to support more candidates like Golden in rural, relatively competitive districts if they ever wish to hold a majority in the House of Representatives. 

This isn’t to say that all districts must undergo this shift, or that Democrats can’t win with a highly progressive platform. Rather, the party must acknowledge that they aren’t splitting the vote in rural regions as they once could pre-2009. In the United States Senate, where rural voters hold considerable sway, the Democratic Party could promote centrist candidates in areas previously won by Trump. This can be seen as the positive alternative to Nancy Pelosi’s backing of Trump candidates who, because of their polarizing appeal, are less likely to win against a progressive party Democratic in many cases. Yet, by backing Trump candidates, instead of centrist Democrats, Pelosi is deleteriously allowing an anti-democratic brand of politics to persist; one which only breeds further resentment amongst Republicans. Of course, it is easy to paint oneself as rational when positioned alongside a Trump candidate, but that’s not what the party should be about, and frankly, it’s not politically sustainable for a party accused by nearly half the country of stealing an election. 

The likelihood of change is slim so long as the levers of the party are in the hands of occasionally detached, certainly rich, urban donors. And perhaps that illustrates this whole conundrum best—Democrats ignore class today at the expense of poor rural voters tomorrow. Whether or not Democrats can pull off “victory” in the midterms is one thing, but you can be certain that the means by which they do will only alienate further voters they once counted amongst their ranks. And it is only right that poor voters in rural areas should react this way. For as the world comes crashing down not everyone can sit back and pontificate over a cup of tea.