I agree that a lot of working-class people don’t prioritize the issues the Democratic establishment calles “social justice”, all of which were selected by the party establishment because they sound virtuous but don’t ask any sacrifices of the rich whatsoever- you’re not going to win working class voters over to a “pro-business Democrat” by making a big thing about that candidate being pro-choice or pro-LGBTQ-that said, there are always a lot of women and an increasing number of “out” gay people in the trades and various other working-class jobs, and most people of color have always identified as working-class.

Trade, however is a big thing.

Job losses in historically industrial states through the first Free Trade Agreement, through NAFTA, and the prospect of far more through TPP are huge motivators for working-class voters. They are life and death. They aren’t about ideological abstractions; they are about whether working-class towns jobs and working-class jobs even survive in this country.

Trump carried the firewall states on his opposition to TPP. Hillary gave him the chance- possibly under pressure from Obama- by refusing to put specific language against the TPP in the platform. Trump blasted us on that over and over and over again when he campaigned in the firewall-and that is the issue that won him just enough voters in the firewall to scrape through.

As to the ones who hate unions and hate social spending and are still heavily “pro-police”, NO Democratic presidential candidate will win them over- even Bill didn’t carry people like that, for a good reason- those voters don’t disagree with the Republicans over anything significant at all.

The votes we need to get in the firewall are the people who’ve been screwed economically since 1980- we can’t win if we leave those voters out in the cold and focus on the small number who made a killing in that next four decades.

That’s my main point.