> 1) policies advocated by people in the D party like Bernie Sanders, e.g. social safety nets for such job losses in manufacturing as described. Isn’t this part

> 1) policies advocated by people in the D party like Bernie Sanders, e.g. social safety nets for such job losses in manufacturing as described. Isn’t this part of the progressive dream? Yes, but progressives aren't really a majority of the party, nor do they have much control over it. The progressive caucus of the Democratic party in Congress has ~100 members, but there is no actual policy one has to support to be in that caucus. Being a "progressive" is a useful label for many Democrats, so they join. As far as I'm concerned, the only "true" progressive members of congress are Justice Democrats (Dems that don't take corporate PAC money for their election campaigns). All others need to have their record carefully examined first. Secondly, the moderate wing of the party always is the first to blame the progressive side for any and every electoral upset or issue, arguing that being associated with their radicality costs them votes. Maybe this is true to an extent, but if these moderate members had their own thing they were running on, they wouldn't be associated with the progressive wing. > 2) How working class voters end up aligning themselves with a party that is less likely to care about them, e.g. by cutting taxes for earners well above the working class income bracket. Republicans cater to a lot of single-issue type things. Guns, abortion, religion. Finally, and maybe I'm completely wrong, but there's a lack of class consciousness among the rural working class (working class in cities at least has geographic proximity to aid organization).