No one yet knows which states will lead off in the Democratic presidential primary contests in 2028. But there’s a very good chance that Nevada will be one of the earliest deciders in the nomination fight. And it’s a whole new world in the Silver State—now that they’ve shelved their outdated caucus system, 2028 will be the first time the state will host a real, contested presidential primary.

So who are the voters that will decide this race in Nevada, and what do they want? This spring, Third Way worked with Global Strategy Group to conduct a survey of 1,000 registered voters who are likely to vote in the Democratic presidential primary, with an oversample of 250 Latino likely primary voters.1 The sample included registered Democrats as well as registered voters who aren’t Democrats but say they are likely to switch their party to participate in the Democratic primary (though there are 13 times as many of the former than the latter in the poll’s universe). The results reveal an electorate that is solidly mainstream, focused on pragmatism over progressivism, and motivated most centrally by simply wanting to win.

Who Are Nevada Democratic Primary Voters?

The vast majority of Nevada Democratic primary voters are people who stay out of politics on social media and pay much more attention to the real world. If you were trying to describe the demographics of the average primary voter in the state as a single person, she would be a white woman without a college degree who is nearing retirement age.

Women comprise a supermajority of likely primary voters at 60%. The primary electorate is racially diverse, with sizable portions of Black voters (14%), Latino voters (14%), and Asian voters (8%), but white voters make up the majority at 65%. Voters over 55 years of age comprise a whopping 63% of the primary electorate, while those under 30 years of age are only 8% of the vote. The four-year college degree attainment rate is 29%, which means more than 7 in 10 Democratic primary voters in Nevada do not have a four-year college degree.

This primary electorate frequently consumes social media, but most do not post on it on a regular basis. They are generally on YouTube and Facebook at least weekly: YouTube weekly use clocks in at 64%, with Facebook at 58%. But X/Twitter and Bluesky users are rare among this group, with only 11% of Democratic primary voters using the former weekly and 9% using the latter. Posting is even rarer: across all platforms, only 21% post anything about politics weekly, with daily posters representing just 8%. In fact, a majority of Nevada primary voters (53%) say they never post on social media about politics.

In terms of how people get their news, broadcast (50%) and local TV (49%) dominate these voters’ news consumption, although a fair number also watch cable news, with 42% citing MS NOW/MSNBC and 41% citing CNN. Less than a quarter read the New York Times on a regular basis.

When it comes to ideology, the primary electorate is left of center but falls well within the mainstream. When asked to describe themselves ideologically, the two largest groups were moderates at 28% and liberals at 26%—and these two groups tracked together throughout the rest of the survey in terms of attitudes and policy preferences. Another 22% called themselves progressive, while only 5% labeled themselves socialist—just shy of the 3% of idiosyncratic Democratic primary voters who called themselves conservative. Similar to the pairing of moderates and liberals, the progressives and socialists tracked attitudinally throughout the poll, illustrating that there are at least two lanes in the Democratic primary. Contrary to common wisdom, however, the center left lane appears to be the larger one, with a combined 54% of the primary electorate tracking in that direction. The further left lane of self-described progressives plus socialists made up only 27% of the sample.

Why does it seem from the political conversation that these numbers should be inverted? One major driving factor is that the far-left cohort is significantly more online than their more mainstream brethren. Among all ideological groups, the 5% who describe themselves as socialists are the most likely to post online at least weekly. In fact, socialists post online so frequently that basically the same number of socialists post online daily (18%) as moderates who post online at least monthly (17%).

Similarly, socialists and progressives are much more likely to have attended a protest or political rally in the past year. A whopping 63% of socialists have done so, while progressives are split more evenly with 46% in that camp. Seven in 10 of both liberals and moderates haven’t attended a protest during Trump 2.0.

What Do Nevada Primary Voters Want in a Leader?

Nevada Democratic primary voters prioritize electability over ideological purity.

By a large margin, they say it’s more important to vote for someone who can win the general election (69%) than to vote for someone who stands by their progressive values (31%). Big majorities of moderates (81%), liberals (72%), and progressives (70%) prefer the former, though 70% of those loud online socialists prefer the latter choice.

They also vastly prefer someone who compromises to get things done (76%) over someone who sticks to their progressive beliefs (24%). Again, huge majorities of moderates (90%) and liberals (85%) prefer compromising. Progressives are more split (53% want to compromise). Socialists are the only group who pick standing by their progressive beliefs in this head-to-head at 54%.

Two-thirds of Nevada primary voters believe that nominating a candidate who is too far left risks losing the general election because they will turn off swing voters. And 85% say that “just because a candidate is moderate does not mean they are boring.”

Where Are Nevada Primary Voters on the Issues?

Despite what you might surmise from the dialogue on X or Bluesky, Democratic primary voters in Nevada are a mainstream bunch that tracks fairly close to the general electorate on key issues.

• On the economy, investing in apprenticeships and vocational training (86%) interests many more primary voters than a Universal Jobs Program (14%).

• When it comes to dealing with costs, 80% said they support expanding tax credits for working people compared to only 19% who support providing direct cash payments.

• On college costs, 65% say they prefer making college more affordable and ensuring students get a return on their investment compared to 35% who want to cancel all student loan debt and make college free.

• On policing, Nevada primary voters want to increase the number of police while holding them accountable over defunding the police by an 87% to 13% margin.

• And on immigration, these primary voters choose deporting convicted criminals while protecting law-abiding immigrants including with a path to citizenship over decriminalizing border crossing and abolishing ICE by a 75% to 25% margin.

Admittedly, on energy policy primary voters were more split: 50% want an all-of-the-above strategy focused on bringing costs down and 49% would prefer to pass the Green New Deal to address climate change. Moderates (63%) prefer all-of-the-above, and liberals are split evenly. Progressives (66%) and socialists (65%) prefer the Green New Deal on this match up. But across the board on the issues that are driving American politics today, it is clear that there are two lanes in the Democratic primary, and on net, the center-left lane is wider than the one on the far left.

Conclusion

To win a swing state like Nevada in 2028, a Democratic nominee must appeal to swing voters and moderates. Thankfully, this survey of Democratic primary voters shows there is a wide-open lane for a center-left candidate in the primary to make a pitch that can do just that. The question now is only who is going to eschew the siren song of the online bubble to make a play for the hearts of primary voters in Nevada and pave a path to general election victory.

This memo was originally published for Third Way on May 22, 2026.

This April, Third Way worked with GBAO to conduct a survey of 2,000 registered voters nationwide.1 This is a continuation of our Signal project series in which we attempt to gauge issue salience to help separate the signal from the noise in the chaotic Trump presidency.

Overall, a clear trend is emerging that voters are losing faith in the Trump Administration’s ability to deliver on its promises and meet their needs.

• Voters are deeply concerned about rising costs and believe the Iran war is making that actively worse.

• Trump’s standing with Independents is weakening, and the share of Trump voters who are disappointed is rapidly increasing

• The Democratic brand is still damaged, but there is real opportunity, especially on the economy, and this should give Democrats a lift heading into the 2026 elections.

• If Democrats take back Congress, they will need to strike a balance between working with Trump and standing up to him—but voters see fixing the economy as the north star.

  ---

The Spring 2026 Political Moment

There’s little debate: voters are sour on the times in which they find themselves living.

When asked if the country is heading in the right direction or off on the wrong track, voters say by a 30-point margin (65% to 35%) and things are off on the wrong track. This is the fourth poll in our Signal tracker poll series, and that number has widened in every iteration. It is currently doubled from what it was a year ago (14-point margin in favor of wrong track). Democrats (-83) and Independents (-46) agree things are on the wrong track, while Republicans are still holding some faith. Conservative Republicans (+48) show more belief than moderate/liberal Republicans (+11), who are slowing approaching breakeven and have fallen more than any other group—having started at a 39-point margin saying right direction a year ago.

For the first time in this project, a majority of voters now (50%) say things are going worse in the Trump presidency than they expected. The share of voters who say things are going better is inversely at an all-time low of just 19%. Some of the biggest slides in that metric are among Latinos and young men, who have moved 18 and 26 points respectively towards “worse than expected” since last summer’s survey.

As one could imagine based on that data, Trump’s approval rating is sliding substantially. This survey finds him at 39%, down four points from the last one. His approval rating is even worse with Independents, currently standing at a measly 31%. While Trump has lost ground with all partisans, his worst slide is with moderate/liberal Republicans, with whom he has lost 40 points of net approval in the last year.

Voters continue to sour on the economy. They overwhelmingly agree that there is high inflation (86%), that the economy is not growing (64%), and that there is increasing unemployment (60%). Eighty-five percent of voters say there is corruption in the economy and government. And a majority of Democrats, Independents, and moderate/liberal Republicans agree with all four of those statements. This is also true of all income brackets.

By contrast, the notion that the United States is currently in a recession only garners 48%, driven by Democrats as well as those who earn under $50,000 a year. The belief the United States is in a recession is down by a substantial amount from the last survey from 2025, so despite widespread economic angst, that term is not the one that is connecting with voters in this moment.

Voters were also asked what they felt they were paying more for today than a year ago. Large majorities cited gasoline (89%), groceries (85%), going out to eat (72%), and utility bills (70%). Those making between $50,000 and $100,000 were the most price conscious about gasoline at 92%, while those making under $50,000 were the most price conscious about groceries at 87% and utility bills at 73%. The area with the biggest gap among incomes was housing, which was at 53%, but those under $50,000 were 23-points more likely to say so than those who made over $100,000, probably a sign that renters are struggling more than homeowners in this economy.

When asked about the most important issue, inflation rains supreme. Democrats, Independents, and Republicans used that word more than any other in an open-end exercise. Democrats and Independents were also likely to bring up health care and the war. Republicans were more likely to bring up illegal immigration than either of those two issues. While Democratic candidates will need to earn the trust of Independents on issues like inflation, health care, and war, it is an advantage that both Democratic and Independent voters are thinking about the same priorities.

The Democratic Party’s Opportunity

The Democratic brand is not in great shape, but there are real opportunities to make inroads and gain the trust of voters.

The favorability rating of the Democratic Party and Congressional Democrats is unmoved over the past year in our surveys. It currently stands at 39% favorable to 58% unfavorable, which is basically where it has been every instance this question has been asked in this project. If movement is to be observed, the Democratic brand image has improved by single digits with Democrats and Independents, while it has worsened with Republicans.

Meanwhile, the favorability of the Republican Party and Congressional Republicans is moving in a negative direction. Their rating of 38% favorable to 58% unfavorable now mirrors the Democratic brand, but that indicates real slippage over the past year. That movement is mainly due to two factors. The first is that Independents used to be a couple of points more sour on Democrats than they were on Republicans, but now that has flipped. The second trend is that there has been real erosion with Republicans, especially moderate/liberal Republicans, who have seen a 24-point slide in their favorability of their own party over the past year.

The generic ballot has moved slightly as well. Democrats now enjoy a 48% to 40% vote lead, up two points from the fall. The most movement has been seen among Latinos (up eight points) and young men (up 10 points).

If Democrats want to cement and expand their ballot strength, they must look to strengthen some emerging patterns on issue trust. Unsurprisingly, they already have big advantages on issues like health care (50% to 26%) and Social Security (43% to 28%) over Republicans. But there has been some real movement for them on other economic issues as well.

Democrats are now more trusted than Republicans on the cost of living (40% to 31%), gas prices (39% to 30%), tariffs (43% to 35%), inflation (39% to 32%), energy costs (38% to 32%), and the economy (39% to 36%). Yet there’s work to do, as sometimes up to 1-in-5 people who say they plan to vote for Democrats in November do not currently trust them on these issues. Other small Democratic advantages include the war in Iran (39% to 34%) and political corruption (31% to 27%), but on those two issues (especially the latter) a lot of voters trust neither party at the moment.

Republicans enjoy an advantage over Democrats on issues relating to security, immigration, and certain fiscal issues. They have the edge on voter trust on border security (51% to 27%), national security (49% to 31%), immigration (47% to 36%), making government more efficient (37% to 30%), the national debt (33% to 28%), and taxes (38% to 34%).

And there is a warning for both parties in how Independents and other ideologically mainstream voters view their respective extremes. The MAGA movement on the right has a 31% favorable rating compared to 62% who view it unfavorably. Only 20% of Independents and 40% of moderate/liberal Republicans have a favorable view of MAGA. While less known than MAGA, the Democratic Socialists of America have a 22% favorable rating compared to 47% unfavorable, with only 16% of Independents and 25% of moderate/conservative Democrats having good things to say about them. Voters still aren’t sure who to trust, but they know it’s not the fringes on either side.

What Voters Want Right Now

Our survey also used a MaxDiff exercise to test issue salience. As expected, messages around economic pain and neglect rose to the top. Likewise, the War in Iran is breaking through due to its perceived economic impact and the disdain that voters have for leaders focusing on it instead of on lowering costs.

The four strongest messages were as follows in order:

• Republicans in Congress are championing a war in Iran that costs more than a billion dollars a day and has already resulted in gas prices rising by more than 30 percent in recent weeks with no end in sight. [Best among Republicans disillusioned with Trump]

• Republicans in Congress voted for a budget bill that bankrupts America with $5 trillion in new debt, and bankrupts Americans by raising health insurance premiums and electricity bills, all while giving tax cuts to billionaires. [Best among undecideds and Independents]

• Republicans in Congress have the wrong priorities, supporting hundreds of billions of dollars on an open-ended war with Iran while they are cutting programs like Medicaid and SNAP because they say we can’t afford them. [Best among Democrats]

• Republicans in Congress voted to slash $1 trillion from Medicaid, threatening coverage for millions of children and hard-working people who can’t otherwise afford health insurance, while increasing premiums for other Americans by 20 percent.

Throughout this project, there has been consistency on economic issues rising to the top, but the Iran war is a new wrinkle.

If Democrats were to take back some level of power in Congress in the midterms, voters are sending a clear message. They want them to focus on the economy above all other things, though that focus can heavily involve standing up to Trump and stopping his agenda.

In a forced choice on the path forward for Democrats, voters chose between two options.

• Democrats should stand up against President Trump’s policies that have raised prices and are hurting regular people.

• Democrats should work with President Trump wherever possible to lower the cost of living for people struggling with high prices.

This question causes friction between Democratic voters and voters overall. The option to work with Trump won by a narrow 50% to 45% margin, thanks to its slim 47% to 45% margin with Independents. However, Democrats want Democratic leaders to stand up to Trump 80% to 18%.

But in another forced choice, voters were asked to choose between the following:

• Democrats should prioritize investigating the Trump administration for misconduct and impeach the President if he has broken the law.

• Democrats should prioritize bringing down costs for the American people, not investigations and impeachment.

The idea that Democrats should focus on the economy rather than investigations won handily in this matchup, 67% to 27%. Independents are begging Democrats to focus on bringing costs down by a 65% to 26% margin, while Democrats split with 49% saying investigate to 47% who say bring costs down.

This is a clear indication that the Democratic base is looking for elected leaders to stand up to and fight Trump, but in service of helping bring prices down. If they claim a gavel this fall, voters will reward Democrats for using it to focus on ending tariffs and gasoline hikes from wars, not impeachment battles.

Conclusion

The Republican Party’s biggest weakness right now is that voters do not believe they are focused on the right issues, namely bringing down costs. In fact, voters believe that their misplaced priorities on things like Iran have even made things worse in terms of issues like gasoline prices. The Democratic brand is still struggling, but there is a clear path forward to hammer Republicans on their failures, misplaced priorities, and their support for tax cuts for the wealthy over help for working people. Democrats, for their part, should stay focused on lowering costs and restoring health care funding. There is a debate to be won and ground to be gained if they make a convincing case that they will focus on what voters truly care about, rather than being distracted like Congressional Republicans have been over the past year.

This memo was originally published for Third Way on May 11, 2026.

This March, Third Way and UnidosUS worked with Impact Research and BSP Research to conduct a phone and text-to-web survey of 1,000 likely voters and an oversample of 850 Hispanic voters.1 The goal was to understand how Americans felt about the Trump Administration’s actions on immigration—and what they want to see moving forward.

Here’s what we learned:

• Voters have soured on Trump’s reckless immigration enforcement campaign.

• Erosion on this issue among Hispanic voters is more acute, helping to erase their 2024 bump in support for both Trump and his party overall.

• There is widespread support for the entire range of reforms to ICE that are being considered by policymakers, and voters want to see those reforms enacted before the agency gets any more funding.

How Voters View Trump’s Immigration Actions

The past year has not been kind to how Americans view President Trump or his mass deportation campaign. His favorability numbers have plummeted, as have those of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Right now, Trump’s overall favorability rating stands at 44% favorable to 55% unfavorable, and he is underwater by 32 points (34% to 66%) with Latino voters. ICE has nearly identical marks, at 43% to 55% overall and 32% to 66% with Latinos. Customs and Border Protection is seen more favorably than ICE overall at 51% favorable to 44% unfavorable, but that agency too is currently underwater with Latinos by five points (45% to 50%).

Trump’s job approval on immigration (44%) now mirrors his job approval overall (43%), a massive erosion from where he started on this issue. Support dips even lower to 41% when voters are asked about his use of federal agents such as ICE in American cities. This is a dramatic collapse for Trump on his signature issue, with approval especially low among Independents at just 38%.

Despite this turnabout on his immigration enforcement efforts, border security remains the only issue on which Trump’s approval rating is not underwater. There, he sits at a 56% approval rating, nearly 10 points higher than his next best issue of crime and public safety at 47%. With Hispanics, Trump’s approval on border security stands at 42%.

It is clear that the recent immigration enforcement actions involving the ICE officers and Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis and other cities across the US have broken through to the public. In all, 97% of voters say they have heard at least something about these events, with a majority of each group having heard a lot about them.

When asked which two groups deserved the most blame for clashes and unrest we’ve seen across major American cities, the Trump Administration and ICE and Border Patrol agents were the only two options that a majority of respondents named, with 51% blaming the Trump Administration and 54% blaming ICE and Border Patrol. Among Hispanics, those responses rose to 60% and 66%, respectively. Undocumented immigrants were the least likely to be blamed (8%), while protestors and activists received much more scrutiny. Even among Republicans, only 16% put the blame on undocumented immigrants, suggesting Trump and his DHS are not even aligned with their own partisans on this issue.

Trump’s Erosion with Latino Voters

The Trump Administration’s actions have damaged Latino voters’ perceptions of President Trump and made their concerns much more salient.

When voters overall were asked what issue was most important for Congress to prioritize, protecting democracy, inflation and the cost of living, and political corruption all topped the list with 19%, 18%, and 17%, respectively. Only 9% said immigration was the most important priority. Among Latino voters, pocketbook issues continue to dominate, with inflation and cost of living at 29% and jobs and the economy at 15%. Notably, immigration was tied with jobs, with 15% saying it should be Congress’s most important priority.

Disapproval of Trump’s immigration actions has impacted voters as a whole, but it appears to be a more significant factor shaping Latino voter views of the President and his party. Among all voters, the political parties are essentially tied in terms of favorability, with Democrats at 39% and Republicans at 38%. Among Latino voters, there is a wider gap: Republicans now have a 34% favorability rating.

This gap shows up on the general congressional ballot as well. Among all voters, Democrats have a four-point advantage, leading 45% to 41% when it comes to who folks plan to support in the coming midterms. Among Latino voters, Democrats have a 61% to 31% lead on the generic ballot, including a 22-point advantage among Latino men, more in line with historical voting patterns for Hispanics and far better than Kamala Harris did in 2024 with Hispanics.

Digging underneath those numbers, Latino voters say they trust Democrats in Congress more than Republicans in Congress on every issue we tested, though neither party gets above 50% on any issue. Democrats enjoy their strongest trust advantage on immigration, where they were trusted nearly twice as much as Republicans (50% to 26%). Their weakest advantage was on border security (41% to 32%). This shows that Latino voters see these as two distinct issues, as does the whole electorate, who still trust Republicans by 20 points on the border.

Voters Want to See Change

Voters don’t find the status quo on immigration enforcement to be acceptable. They want to see reforms, and they support the broad swath of transparency and accountability changes under discussion in Washington.

The following reforms all garner at least two-thirds support overall, including with Latino voters:

• Requiring immigration officers to use body cameras when interacting with the public (94% overall, 88% Latino);

• Expanding training requirements for ICE and immigration enforcement agents and requiring officer certification before they can start work (86% overall, 85% Latino);

• Requiring that ICE verifies that someone is not a US citizen prior to detaining them (84% overall, 86% Latino);

• Requiring that ICE have probable cause to believe someone is here illegally before detaining them (80% overall, 80% Latino);

• Allowing state and local police to investigate federal immigration officers if they are accused of using excessive force (72% overall, 81% Latino)

• Requiring federal agents to notify local authorities before conducting large-scale immigration enforcement operations in their cities or towns (71% overall, 82% Latino);

• Banning ICE and immigration enforcement agents from entering private property without a warrant (70% overall, 78% Latino);

• Requiring officers conducting immigration enforcement to wear uniforms and IDs displaying their agency, ID number, and last name (70% overall, 86% Latino);

• Ending immigration arrests in sensitive locations like places of worship, schools, and hospitals (66% overall, 78% Latino); and,

• Prohibiting immigration officers from stopping people based on their job, spoken language and accent, or their race and ethnicity (66% overall, 78% Latino).

We also asked respondents to identify the two changes they most wanted to see in terms of how ICE operates. Voters overall prioritized reforms that would ensure accountability and fairness. They gave high marks to body cameras (26%), requiring probable cause (23%), more training and certificates for agents (19%), and guaranteeing a court hearing (16%).

Latino voters had slightly different priorities, including requiring probable cause (26%) and body cameras (24%), but also banning ICE from stopping folks based on race, language, or job (23%), and banning arrests in certain sensitive locations (20%).

The Broader Picture

Given their strong support for these reforms, it is no surprise that voters are more likely to blame Republicans than Democrats for the current shutdown over Department of Homeland Security funding. Overall, respondents place more blame on Republicans for refusing to reform ICE than Democrats for insisting on ICE reforms, by an 11-point margin (53% to 42%). Among Independents, that gap grows to 15 points (54% to 39%), and among Latino voters, it rises to 29 points (62% to 33%).

As a broader matter, a majority of voters feel like the actions of President Trump and Republicans have crossed a line.

• 55% of voters overall and 70% of Latino voters agree that “President Trump and Republicans have gone too far. We need an effective border and immigration system, with enforcement that respects the rights and safety of American citizens and non-citizens alike.”

• That compares to 43% of all voters and 29% of Latinos who prefer the statement “President Trump and Republicans are on the right track. We need to do what’s necessary to secure our border, crack down on people coming in illegally, and deport anyone who broke the law coming here in the first place.”

And while there is a broad rejection of this Administration’s extreme and chaotic approach, most voters still believe there is a way to conduct immigration enforcement in this country that aligns with their values. A majority of voters (54%) and two-thirds of Latino voters oppose deporting all undocumented immigrants. Instead, there is supermajority support for targeted enforcement to remove undocumented immigrants with a criminal record or those who are recent arrivals without legal basis to stay (77%). In fact, the proportion of Latino voters who support that kind of targeted enforcement (68%) is nearly identical to the number who oppose deporting all undocumented immigrants (66%).

There is significant support for major reforms to ICE, with 59% of voters wanting to see significant action before ICE gets any additional funding, and only 40% saying ICE needs to be fully funded now. Among Latinos, a staggering 81% want policymakers to make major changes before passing funding for this agency, with a mere 18% saying ICE needs to be fully funded to continue its current operations. Of the 59% who want to see major changes at ICE, 27% of voters overall and 41% of Latino voters want to “Abolish ICE.” Another 32% of voters overall, including 40% of Latino voters, say “ICE requires major reforms before it can be given more money to continue immigration enforcement.”

Conclusion

Across the country, voters are rejecting what they’re seeing from President Trump and his administration and demanding reforms to bring transparency and accountability to immigration enforcement operations. They believe the status quo is unacceptable, and that the changes under discussion are eminently reasonable. But they are not asking Washington to choose between immigration enforcement and guardrails—they are demanding both. And with Latino voters especially clear that the current approach has gone too far, policymakers who refuse these reforms are not defending public safety, they are ignoring a broad and growing public consensus.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on April 16, 2026.

This February, Third Way worked with Global Strategy Group to conduct an online survey of 1,400 registered voters who said they are likely to vote in a Democratic Presidential primary.12 The purpose was to understand who the people are that will likely determine the next Democratic nominee for president, what they value, and what they want to see at the top of the ticket. This is the second such poll in a project that started in fall 2025, the first iteration of which can be found here.

Here’s what we gleaned:

• Democratic primary voters live lives that are similar to the average American—and quite likely different than most political operatives and commentators (including the authors of this memo). They also aren’t regularly contributing to the political narrative on social media.

• They characterize themselves primarily as liberal and moderate, with only a tiny slice calling themselves socialist, and the latter have a very different profile than the rest of the primary electorate.

• They want their candidate to be a fighter for working people who is not afraid to stand up to Trump, and they care more about winning than ideological purity.

  ---

1. Who Are Democratic Primary Voters?

If you spend time on X or Bluesky, you might assume most folks who will choose the Democratic nominee for president in 2028 will be activist college students, self-described Democratic socialists, or far-left ideologues who will want candidates to embrace revolutionary ideas that “move the Overton window.”

But the truth is that the typical Democratic primary voter is a white woman over the age of 55 without a college degree. These primary voters are:

• 61% female and 38% male;

• 65% white and 35% non-white;

• 60% non-college and 40% college educated; and

• 55% 55 years of age or older, with only 12% under 30.

Fifty-eight percent of primary voters call themselves Christian, with only 9% saying they are atheist. In fact, three times as many Democratic primary voters self-identify as born again or Evangelical than the number who identify as atheist.

Primary voters are also less online than one might expect. Only 13% of them say they post about politics online daily. Triple that amount said they never post about politics online. Clearly, the social media cacophony is being created by a tiny slice of the primary electorate, and the majority live in the real world.

We asked these primary voters how they would label themselves ideologically. The most popular response was liberal at 43% followed close behind by moderate at 34%. Another 11% called themselves progressive, while a tiny sliver of 6% described themselves as socialist. Nearly as many labeled themselves conservative (5%)—a fact that will likely surprise many who live in a Twitter bubble. Throughout the survey, the 17% combined progressives and socialists often tracked together, while the 77% combined liberals and moderates were aligned.

2. What Are Primary Voters’ Lives Like?

Since most Democratic primary voters aren’t spending their days obsessively posting about politics on social media, we asked a series of questions about what they do in their day-to-day lives to gain a fuller picture of this group that will choose the party’s next presidential nominee.

• 76% say they drive a car regularly, compared to 24% who take public transportation regularly (these were not forced choice questions; you could answer yes to all).

• 56% say they watch the NFL regularly, compared to 7% who are members of a book club.

• Only 41% have three months of emergency savings, and only 33% have money in the stock market.

• Only 15% hold college debt.

• Only 16% have attended a protest or demonstration in the past year.

As far as daily habits go, the socialists stand out compared to other groups (though admittedly, the sample size is small). Only 14% of Democrats own or have owned any cryptocurrency, but that number is more than ten percentage points higher at 26% for socialists. Likewise, 14% of Democrats vape regularly, but socialists are at 26% (and conservatives are at 24%). No other group is close.

Socialists are also not a sports-loving bunch. As mentioned above, 56% of Democrats watch the NFL and 35% watch college sports. Socialists are 30 percentage points lower than any other group on these measures, with only 17% of socialists saying they watch the NFL and 4% saying they watch college sports.

As referenced above, a surprisingly low number of respondents say they hold college debt. No group is above 20%, except for socialists who are at 48%. Similarly, socialists are an outlier on holding emergency savings. No group is below 38%, except for socialists at 10%.

Socialists were also a mixed bunch on how they get around, with 48% each saying they drive cars and take public transportation. And as much of an outlier as this small group was in lifestyle, the same was true when it came to political preferences and approach.

3. What Do Primary Voters Want in a Leader?

As countless Democrats prepare to throw their hats in the ring and explore presidential runs, we wanted to understand what kind of leader would appeal to these primary voters in this moment. The answers might surprise those who typically do this kind of pulse check on social media.

When asked about a series of statements on candidate attributes, primary voters responded overwhelmingly that they want a candidate who fights for working people, and they value authenticity over ideology.

• 89% said that moderate candidates were not inherently boring.

• 88% would vote for someone they don’t agree with on every issue as long as they fight for working people.

• 72% said they would support someone they don’t agree with on everything as long as they are seen as authentic and true to what they believe.

• 66% are worried that nominating someone who is too far left risks losing the general election because they could turn off swing voters, while only 45% said they worried that nominating a moderate wouldn’t generate the excitement that we need to turn people out to vote.

Overwhelmingly, primary voters in our poll preferred a candidate who works across the aisle to get things done over a candidate who sticks to their progressive beliefs, even if it means getting less done: the former won 75% to 25%. Working across the aisle was more popular with all ideological groups except socialists, who preferred sticking to their beliefs 73% to 27%.

Similarly, when asked to pick between a candidate who is authentic, relatable, and down-to-earth, even if they don’t line up with you ideologically on every issue, or a candidate who stands with you on most of the major issues, even if they seem more like a typical politician than you’d like, the former wins 59% to 41%. Over 60% of liberals and moderates pick the former, progressives are split 50% apiece, and socialists pick the latter by a 57% to 43% margin.

We also asked a forced choice question designed to test two theories of the case for how to be a fighter:

• 53% preferred a candidate will fight every day for the working people of this country, delivering a safer, stronger, and more affordable future.

• 47% picked a candidate who believes that billionaires and corporate interests have too much power in this country and will fight the oligarchy and go after corporations that have rigged the system.

Moderates and conservatives each pick the “fighter for” message with 61%, and liberals back it with 57%. Progressives choose the “fighter against” with 69%, while socialists pick it with 90%. Clearly, there’s an appetite in the Democratic primary electorate for an angry, anti-oligarchy message, but it turns out the lane for a fighter for working people is at least as big, and it wins by double digits with the ideological groups who make up the biggest chunks of this cohort.

Finally, in this existential moment, these voters just want to win. Electability reigns, with 62% preferring someone who can win the general election against a Republican and only 38% saying they’d want someone who stands by their progressive values, even if it would make them less electable. Liberals and moderates overwhelmingly choose the former. Progressives are split evenly, and socialists say by 63% to 37% they prefer the latter.

4. What Do Primary Voters Want on Policy?

In the fall poll in this series, we tested center-left and left-wing policy ideas in forced choice exercises, finding that the center-left ideas tied the far-left ones on some issues and massively outperformed them on the rest. This time we tested various proactive policies separately to see if primary voters would find them appealing if offered the chance to choose them all.

What we found is that there is near unanimous support uniting the entire primary coalition for a range of center-left ideas:

• 96% support for building on the Affordable Care Act;

• 95% support for investing in a range of energy sources to bring down bills;

• 95% support for providing more low-cost vocational training and apprenticeship opportunities; and,

• 93% support for overhauling ICE to focus only on dangerous criminals.

There was also support among Democratic primary voters for a series of ideas that are further to the left, though none of those ideas were as popular as their center-left comparisons.

• 83% of these primary voters said they would vote for a candidate who supported Medicare for All (13 points lower than building on the ACA);

• 74% said the same about the Green New Deal (21 points below the energy option above);

• 72% would vote for a candidate who wants to cancel all student debt and make college free (eroding 23 points from apprenticeships); and,

• 59% would consider supporting someone who said Abolish ICE (34 points below overhauling the agency).

The lesson here should be that Democratic candidates need not embrace a litany of far-left ideas to woo primary voters. No doubt, there will be a far-left lane that some candidates occupy, and a decent proportion of voters in the primary may find those takes appealing. But there’s an even broader appetite for ideas that unite the coalition—and enable a candidate to win in a general election.

This preference is evident when we asked primary voters to choose between two options, rather than saying yes to everything. Overhauling ICE wins over abolishing the agency by a 2-1 margin: 66% to 34%. Liberals, moderates, and conservatives all prefer the former, while progressives and socialists prefer the latter with socialists at 70% support for the second option.

And capitalism with guardrails beats socialism 62% to 38%, with majority support from all ideological groups except (unsurprisingly) socialists, 100% of whom preferred socialism.

One place where primary voters took a different approach was on redistricting. A whopping 62% want Democrats to “fight fire with fire” against Republican mid-decade gerrymandering by partaking in it themselves in blue states, compared to 38% who say we should stick to democratic norms on fair districts. Every ideological group was united on this approach, except conservative Democrats.

Compared to public polling from before 2025, this is a huge shift in public opinion among Democrats and underscores that fighting must be a key attribute of any Democratic approach moving forward.

Conclusion

The key takeaway from this research is that Democratic primary voters want an authentic and down-to-earth leader who is more focused on results than a checklist of progressive ideological policies. They want someone who will fight against Trump and for working people, and most importantly, they want to win. As the narrative around 2028 continues to take shape, we will continue to conduct research with this group to remind commentators and candidates alike that Twitter is not real life, primary voters are pragmatic, and they don’t want their nominee to go so far left in a primary that they can’t win against MAGA in the general.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on March 2, 2026.

Takeaways

• President Trump’s job approval is 34 points underwater among young men, with 32% approving and 66% disapproving of his performance in office.

• A paltry 26% of young men would back a J.D. Vance presidential run in the 2028 general election, with 55% opposing and 17% unsure.

• A 61% supermajority of young men say Trump is not fulfilling his campaign promise to put America first, including 25% of young Republican men and 64% of Independents.

• Thirty-three percent of young men combined—including 15% of young Republican men—hold Trump (24%) and Republican leaders (9%) as the figures with the greatest responsibility for lowering the country’s temperature around political violence, while just 6% say Democratic leaders hold this responsibility.

• Young men are most alarmed by Trump’s $1 trillion cut to health care (66% very concerned), followed by his opposition to fully releasing the Epstein files (63%), and his expansion of immigration raids to target anyone who looks or sounds foreign (60%).

• Sixty-five percent of young men say that they are either struggling to pay bills (27%) or are just making enough to pay bills (38%).

• Fifty-eight percent of young men believe that Trump has negatively impacted their finances, while just 23% say that he has had a positive impact.

• Half of young men blame Trump’s tariffs for higher grocery costs (49%), while a larger share blame private corporations that purchase real estate for high housing costs (65%).

• An astonishing 73% of young men believe that American culture has changed for the worse since their parents were their age—20 points higher than the electorate overall.

One year after being sworn in and winning 54% of young men in the 2024 election, Donald Trump is hemorrhaging support with this cohort. In last year’s focus groups, we found that young men who voted for Trump expressed serious concerns about his handling of the economy, tariffs, and immigration enforcement, though most were willing to take a wait-and-see approach as to how his policies panned out. To further analyze where the young male electorate stands today, Third Way worked with HIT Strategies to conduct a nationwide mixed mode survey in December 2025 of 1,462 young men, 18 to 29 years old, who are registered to vote.

Trump Job Approval, Vance 2028, & America First?

It’s no secret that Donald Trump formed a unique coalition with young men in 2024, swinging them 18 points to the right in the general election, with even more acute swings among young men of color. Yet, just one year into his term, his standing with this bloc has deteriorated significantly. President Trump’s job approval is now 34 points underwater with young men, with just 32% approving and 66% disapproving of his performance in office—including 48% strongly disapproving. This marks a dramatic reversal of his 2024 strength, when he held a 58% retrospective job approval rating among young men and a 56% favorability rating, according to analysis of AP Votecast data.

These numbers should be nothing but alarming for President Trump and his allies. A stunning 68% of Independent young men disapprove of his job performance, along with 27% of Republicans and 23% of Trump voters. Interestingly, 26% of young men who indicated that they would vote for a Republican on the 2026 generic congressional ballot also disapprove of Trump’s performance. And after the president made substantial gains with young men of color in 2024, he now holds a 63% disapproval rating with young Latino men and 79% disapproval with young Black men.

This bleeding of support also appears to have spread to Vice President J.D. Vance’s prospects for 2028. While the presidential election is a far way off, we wanted to gauge where Vance starts his base of support at with young men, if he is indeed to be Trump’s successor in the party (as Trump has previously suggested). The results show that a paltry 26% of young men would back a Vance candidacy in the 2028 general election, with 55% opposing and 17% unsure—leaving him with both weak initial support and a low ceiling.

What’s perhaps most interesting is that 15% of young men who voted for Trump in 2024 would not back a Vance candidacy, with 9% strongly opposing, while young men who did not vote in 2024 break 51-24% against Vance. However, if one were looking for potential areas of growth for Vance, there does appear to be a large contingent of Independent, young men of color who are undecided and remain open to voting for a Vance candidacy—but this support level is a far cry from the coalition that Trump assembled.

This all begs the question—why are young men turning on Donald Trump and his vice president? Our data shows that voters simply do not believe that Donald Trump is upholding his campaign promises. When asked if Trump is fulfilling his promise to put America first, a whopping 61% of young men said no, with strong majorities across race and ethnicity rejecting the notion that the president is keeping his famous campaign promise, along with 25% of young Republican men, 59% of moderates, and 64% of Independents.

There is no one explanation to the revolt against Trump. Many voters are seeing Trump’s focus turn toward foreign policy, crackdowns on immigration, and giveaways to the wealthy and well connected—not fulfilling his promise to improve their financial circumstances.

A core plank of Trump’s 2024 platform—and a key reason why he won over so many moderate and Independent young men—was his promise to tackle the affordability crisis, yet most young men today remain far from satisfied with what he has delivered so far. When we asked whether Trump has had a positive or negative impact on their personal financial outlook, a 58% majority of young men responded that Trump has negatively impacted their finances, while just 23% say that he has had a positive impact. This comes as the president tries to distance himself from stubborn inflation while repeatedly calling the affordability crisis “a hoax.”

Astonishingly, across race and partisan affiliation, fewer young men say that Trump has improved their personal finances than say they approve of his overall job performance—meaning that even Trump’s supporters are not thrilled with his economic stewardship. As it stands today, 71% of young Black men, 59% of young white men, and 48% of young Latino men say that Trump has negatively impacted their finances—with Latino men being the most optimistic of Trump’s economic impact at 32% positive. Perhaps most dire for Trump is that 60% of young Independent men say that he has negatively impacted their finances.

Trump Admin Actions, Paying Bills, & Economic Enemies

Looking back at some of the actions that Trump and his administration have taken in his first year, we find that young men are most offput by Trump cutting $1 trillion in health care funding to give tax cuts to the top 1% (66% very concerned), followed by Trump opposing the full release of the Epstein files (63% very concerned), and Trump expanding immigration raids and arrests to include anyone who looks or sounds foreign (60% very concerned). While this survey was conducted before the fatal shootings by ICE and CBP in Minneapolis, the salience in opposition to Trump’s immigration crackdown is significant and has likely only grown in the last month.

Notably, every single Trump action tested in this survey was highly unpopular with respondents. Concerns about DOGE creating a centralized database of Americans (56% very concerned), and the Trump Administration’s use of new surveillance tools to monitor Americans’ flights and social media activity (55% very concerned) fell in the middle of the pack. Similar levels of concern were expressed about Trump cracking down on the free speech of comedians and journalists (56% very concerned) and deploying the National Guard to blue states (55% very concerned)—demonstrating consistent opposition to Trump’s consolidation of federal power.

When we break down these responses by political affiliation, we find that Republican young men are far and away most concerned about Trump opposing the Epstein file release (41% very concerned). Comparatively, the most cited concern for Democrats (94%) and Independents (67%) was Trump’s health care cuts—which should be little surprise given the salience that health care cuts have taken on in recent months.

The reality is that young men’s financial stress has continued unabated throughout the first year of the Trump Administration, and it is closely tied to their negative rating of the Trump economy. Sixty-five percent of young men say that they are either struggling to pay bills (27%) or are just making enough to pay bills (38%). This is especially acute among young Black, Latino, and Democratic men. Meanwhile, young Republican men appear to be the most economically secure in the Trump economy, with a 45% plurality saying they’re making enough to pay bills and save money.

While Trump’s base may be more financially secure—or at the very least are less inclined to be critical about their economic fortunes under his presidency—the personal finances of key swing groups that shifted toward Trump are in a dire state, raising the question of where these voters are placing the blame.

In AP Votecast’s 2024 presidential election survey, 67% of voters nationwide said that they were “very concerned” with the cost of food and groceries—the highest level of concern of any issue, including among nearly 70% of Black, Latino, and white non-college voters. Trump won these voters by a wide 61-38% margin over Harris. When we asked voters who they blamed for the increased costs of groceries today, 49% of young men placed the blame squarely on Trump’s tariffs, followed by “a corrupt political system” (39%) and corporate food manufacturers (38%).

This is consistent across race, with 60% of young Black men and 50% of young Latino men attributing the Trump tariffs as the primary cause for high grocery costs, along with 46% of Independents and 20% of Republicans. It’s clear that Trump’s implementation of harmful tariffs—vividly and directly linked to higher consumer costs—has proven deeply damaging to his standing with the voters who expected him to act on lowering grocery prices.

Following the cost of groceries, the issue that voters said was the second highest level of concern in 2024 was the cost of housing. Our survey shows that across race and political affiliation, respondents place the greatest blame for the lack of affordability in the housing market on private corporations. An overwhelming 65% of young men blame “private corporations who buy real estate,” followed by “a corrupt political system” (37%), and red tape in local government (22%).

Unlike tariffs, which have become closely and vividly associated with rising grocery costs, Trump may be poised to take on the economic villain young men most often blame for high housing prices. Trump recently announced his support for banning large institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes, a move that could draw bipartisan support from Democrats, given that it’s been a cornerstone of their legislation for years. Still, even if such legislation were to pass and be signed into law—a significant hurdle in itself—it remains an open question if voters would see any immediate relief. And it is uncertain if Trump would receive any political points in the face of stubbornly high prices elsewhere in the economy—a political reality that Trump’s predecessor faced with much of his agenda.

American Culture, Dialogue, and Political Violence

To better understand how young men perceive the broader state of American society, we asked a series of questions about changes in American culture, dialogue with people who hold different political views, and who bears responsibility for lowering the temperature around political violence.

An astonishing 73% of young men believe that American culture has (mostly/slightly) changed for the worse since their parents were their age, and just 21% say it has changed for the better—a notably higher share than in the electorate overall. Recent PRRI polling finds that 55% of voters nationwide say American culture has changed for the worse, while 43% say is has changed for the better—a nearly 20-point gap between young men’s negative views of American culture and the nation as a whole. White young men and Republican young men are the harshest critics of American culture today, with majorities of both saying that it has mostly changed for the worse. Interestingly, young Black (25%) and Democratic men (29%) are the most likely to say that America has changed for the better.

Despite backing Trump in 2024, young Latino men differ from Republican voters in being less acutely critical of American culture and society—just 33% say the country has mostly changed for the worse—highlighting that Latino voters retain a sense of opportunity and optimism in the American Dream that is distinct from other voter blocs.

To measure another aspect of American culture and how young men view a core norm in a democracy, we asked respondents how important they believe it is to engage in conversations with people who hold different political views. Notably, 67% said it was “very important,” with another 20% saying it was somewhat important, and 13% saying these conversations were not very or not at all important.

When we break this down by young men’s ideological label, we find that there’s a notable divide between the most ideologically extreme and the most moderate voters. Young men at the ideological extremes—those who identified as MAGA (54%), socialist (59%), and progressive (62%)—are less likely to say that cross-aisle dialogue is “very important” in our society than voters at the center-right and center-left—traditional conservatives (75%), liberals (71%), and moderates (71%).

This suggests that this core tenet of a healthy democracy is less a clash between right and left than a divide between the political center and the ideological extremes. As our prior research with Trump-supporting moderate young men showed, swing voters value having open and nonjudgemental conversations about politics and culture—and are more receptive to elected leaders who model that openness.

Finally, with the horrific rise of targeted political violence in the country, we wanted to gauge voters on who they believe bears the primary responsibility to lower the temperature around acts of political violence. Twenty-eight percent of young men say that the media holds the primary responsibility to lower the country’s temperature around political violence, followed by everyday Americans (26%), Donald Trump (24%), and Republican leaders (9%).

A closer look at the data reveals clear partisan divides around who young men believe should lower the political temperature. Young Democratic men hold Trump (41%) as the primary figure to temper the rhetoric around political violence, while Independents say it is the responsibility of everyday Americans (41%), and Republicans place accountability with the media (36%).

Still, it’s notable that 33% of young men—including 15% of young Republican men—hold Trump and Republican leaders, who currently hold the levers of federal power, as the figures most responsible for lowering the country’s temperature, while just 6% say Democratic leaders hold this responsibility. Despite this, there have been countless examples in recent months of the president continuing to post aggressive rhetoric against politicians, even from his own party, and those recipients receiving real-world threats of violence. As we get further into a polarized and violent political era where such rhetoric, threats, and shootings become more frequent, it’s clear that young men are looking for leaders in all parts of society who will rise to the moment, de-escalate, and show their humanity.

Conclusion

While some young men are still drawn to Trump and the Republican Party, this survey makes clear that there is a wide swath of persuadable swing voters who are turning on Trump and his vice president. From the chaos of tariffs causing higher grocery prices, to the overreach in immigration crackdowns, to the president’s opposition of releasing the Epstein files, there is a bitter taste with many of the voters who broke for Trump in 2024. Those who wish to understand what economic and cultural burdens young men are feeling in this moment—and why they are softening on the GOP—would do well to reflect on this data in the years ahead.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on February 12, 2026.

Takeaways

• Democrats lead the generic congressional ballot 61-31% among young men (18-29) who are likely to vote in 2026—closely aligning with how Democrats fared in the last two midterm cycles.

• Republican and Independent young men say they are significantly more likely to skip the 2026 midterms and opt to vote in the 2028 presidential election.

• Young men favor moderation in both parties: 55% want Democrats to become more moderate rather than more liberal (30%), and 67% want Republicans to become more moderate rather than more conservative (17%).

• Young men hold the greatest reservations about supporting Democrats who are out of touch with working people and Republicans who are corrupt and in the pocket of billionaires.

• By a 55-43% margin, young men prefer a presidential candidate who backs capitalism with guardrails over one who advocates moving toward socialism.

• When it comes to personal success, young men place the greatest value on providing for a family and financial independence—priorities most associated with Republicans.

Young men continue to occupy a central part of the conversation in the American electorate—and for good reason. In focus groups from last year, we found that Democrats have a significant challenge on their hands to reverse their slippage with young men, but neither party has cemented them as a reliable voter bloc. To further analyze where the young male electorate stands today, Third Way worked with HIT Strategies to conduct a nationwide mixed mode survey in December 2025 of 1,462 young men, 18 to 29 years old, who are registered to vote.

2026 Generic Congressional Ballot

After Donald Trump made significant inroads with young men in 2024, less than one year out from the 2026 midterms, our survey shows that Democrats lead the generic congressional ballot among registered young men by 16 points, with a notable 38% undecided. Democrats’ advantage expands to 18 points when undecided voters are pushed and grows to 30 points when looking just at those likely to vote in the midterms—breaking 61-36% for Democrats over Republicans.

This closely aligns with how Democrats fared in the last two midterm cycles. In 2022, 58% of young men 18-to-29-years-old backed Democrats, and 62% supported congressional Democrats in the 2018 blue wave, according to Catalist.

Diving a layer into the data, we find some notable trends:

• Moderate and traditional conservative young men are the largest blocs of undecided voters up for grabs, with 57% of moderates and 38% of traditional conservatives undecided on the initial congressional ballot (before being pushed).

• Eight percent of young men who voted for Trump in 2024 say they will vote for a Democrat in 2026.

• Among young men who did not vote in 2024, 50% would vote for a Democrat, 37% for a Republican.

Diving into the racial and ethnic divide, we find that while Democrats have regained substantial ground with young white men compared to Harris’s 2024 support—a whopping 16-point improvement—they have yet to recover lost support among young Black men and have only marginally improved their standing with young Latino men by four points. It’s clear that these gains are uneven, underscoring why claims that Democrats have fully brought young men back into their corner may be premature.

In recent months, many pundits have been quick to claim that Democrats have solved their problems with young men. Our research suggests otherwise—and explains why the 2026 off-year electorate may be a one-time advantage for Democrats. Swingy, moderate, low-propensity young men who backed Trump in 2024 are much less likely than stalwart Democrats to show up and vote in 2026, creating an enthusiasm gap that favors Democrats in the short term—however, that gap could narrow as the election approaches. When we break down the young men electorate’s likelihood to vote in 2026 and 2028, we find that Republican and Independent young men say they are significantly more likely to skip the 2026 midterms and opt to vote in the 2028 presidential election.

This pattern is consistent with Catalist data from the last four election cycles, which shows that Democratic support among young men declined by six points between the 2018 midterms and the 2020 presidential election and by 12 points between the 2022 midterms and the 2024 presidential election. While Democrats should feel hopeful and motivated for 2026, an off-year election that will primarily be a referendum on Trump, does not necessarily indicate that Democrats have solved all their vulnerabilities with young men, especially in presidential election years when a more moderate and conservative electorate will be turning out to vote.

Ideology & Direction of the Parties

In the aftermath of the 2024 election, a broad debate has emerged over the Democratic Party’s future ideological direction—and over whether the Republican Party has moved too far to the extreme in the early months of the Trump Administration. To gain a deeper understanding of these ideological currents, we asked respondents to place themselves, the political parties, and liberal and conservative activists on a 0 to 10 scale—where 0 represents “very liberal” and 10 represents “very conservative.” The results show that young men place themselves nearly dead center on the ideological scale, with a mean response of 4.8.

By comparison, the Democratic Party receives a mean score of 3.6 and the Republican Party a 7.5—placing young men just 1.2 points from Democrats, but 2.7 points to the left of Republicans. A 1.5-point gap might not be a lot, but these ratings act like a Richter scale, so when voters put themselves closer to Democrats than to Republicans, it’s a sign of a brewing political problem for the GOP. This is also significant movement from our 2024 post-election poll, when young men placed themselves closer to Trump than Harris on the ideological scale.

Meanwhile, we find that young men place liberal activists (2.5) and conservative activists (7.7) at roughly equal distances—about three points—from their mean ideology. Notably, liberal activists are perceived as significantly further to the left of the Democratic Party—by roughly one point—while the Republican Party is seen as nearly in complete lockstep with conservative activists. These perceptions suggest that young men view both the Republican Party and conservative activists as operating further outside the mainstream than the Democratic Party, but so are liberal activists.

To further examine how the political parties are viewed today, we asked respondents what ideological direction each party should pursue—and young men were unequivocal in their preference for moderation.

A 55% majority of young men want the Democratic Party to become more moderate, compared with 30% who want it to become more liberal and 13% who prefer the party stay the same. Strong majorities of young Latino (58%) and white men (55%), along with a plurality of young Black men (46%), favor Democrats moving toward the center rather than tacking further to the left.

Meanwhile, a 67% supermajority want the Republican Party to become more moderate, compared with just 17% who want it to become more conservative and 13% who prefer the GOP to stay the same. Nearly two-thirds of both young white men and young men of color say they would prefer the Republican Party to become more moderate, suggesting broad concern among young men that the party has grown too ideologically extreme. As it turns out, this desire for moderation is closely tied to how young men think about their individual life goals and which party they associate those goals with.

Personal Goals & Perception of Parties & Activists

To assess how young men think about personal success, and how they associate this with politics, we asked what individual life goals they value the most. We found that across race and political affiliation, respondents place the highest priority on providing for family (88%), financial independence (82%), and having a fulfilling job (74%), which is consistent with findings from NBC News last year. On its face, this data shows that economic security and fulfilling a duty of care for family are central to young men’s identities. While respondents ranked marriage and religion lower among their explicit goals, many young men view these as inseparable from providing for their families—and as far more important life goals than simply getting rich or achieving status. And, as we note later, the two goals that young men value most are also the ones they most strongly associate with Republicans—priorities they don’t see represented in the Democratic Party.

A closer look at the data reveals clear partisan divides around traditional economic and family values. Young Republican men place substantially greater importance on marriage (a 41-point gap compared with Democrats), having children (also a 41-point gap), and being grounded in faith (a 49-point gap). By contrast, young Democratic men place more emphasis on emotional stability than Republicans do—a 20-point gap—ranking it alongside providing for family as their top markers of success.

Looking across racial and ethnic groups, we see that young Latino men place higher value than their white and Black peers on financial independence, emotional stability, religion, earning more than their parents, and having influence. Meanwhile, young Black men place slightly more importance on having a fulfilling job than either white or Latino men.

To better understand who young men believe speaks to their most important life goals and concerns, we examined another dimension of today’s attention economy—an ecosystem that has never mattered more in American politics. We asked respondents who they perceive as talking most about key issues among liberal and conservative activists, as well as elected Democrats and Republicans.

We found that elected Democrats are most associated with economic affordability (27%), social and cultural issues (25%), and working-class issues (24%). However, Democrats are effectively absent when it comes to being associated with more masculine and identity-based topics, such as “how to be a good man” (9%), “finding a partner and starting a family” (9%), and “financial independence and career success” (18%). Republicans, by contrast, are perceived as connecting economic issues to personal identity and individual character. Elected Republicans have the strongest association with “financial independence and career success” (35%) and with finding a partner and starting a family (34%).

When we examine Democrats and Republicans side by side, Republicans are twice as likely to be associated with financial independence and individual character compared to Democrats, and there is a 25-point gap between the two when it comes to talking about starting a family. These findings are consistent with focus groups that Third Way conducted last year, which found that young men believe Republicans best represent men’s priorities of achieving financial independence and taking care of one’s family—and, as we showed earlier, young men place the greatest value on these for individual life goals.

Meanwhile, Democrats are more than twice as likely to be associated with social and cultural issues compared to Republicans. Democrats hold a 10-point lead when talking about affordability—though it does not dominate the Democratic brand the way certain individual goals do with Republicans—and they hold a slight four-point edge on working-class issues over Republicans.

By comparison, both liberal and conservative activists are perceived as more ideologically extreme versions of elected Democrats and Republicans, shaping how young men interpret each party’s brand and messaging. Conservative activists dominate the conversation around “how to be a good man” (53%) and starting a family (44%). Liberal activists, on the other hand, are most closely associated with social and cultural issues (44%), economic affordability (36%), and working-class issues (34%)—with social and cultural issues being nearly 10 points more associated with activists than economic issues. While liberal activists may be amplifying Democrats’ strength on affordability, they may also be increasing the party’s association with cultural issues—an area young men already link most strongly with the left—while diverting attention from messaging around individual aspirational life goals.

Vulnerabilities of the Parties & 2028

It’s clear that young men have significant reservations about supporting both parties, so to better understand this relationship, we asked what the biggest factors are that would prevent these voters from voting for both Democratic and Republican candidates. The results show that young men are driven primarily by concerns about candidates who are out of touch with working people, ideologically extreme, and corrupt.

The greatest reservations that would prevent young men from voting for Democratic candidates are “being out of touch with the working class” (39%), “being inauthentic and unrelatable” (29%), and “being too ideologically extreme” (20%).

Importantly, reservations were markedly varied across party identification. Democratic young men are most concerned about Democrats who are out of touch with the working class and inauthentic. Independent and Republican young men place far greater weight on ideological extremism than Democrats do, while Republicans, unsurprisingly, express strong concerns about voting for a Democrat that is weak on border security and immigration.

Alternatively, the top reasons that would prevent young men from voting for a Republican candidate include being “corrupt and in the pocket of billionaires and big corporations” (44%), “allowing President Trump to seize new federal powers” (27%), and being “too ideologically extreme” (24%).

Across party lines, the most decisive dealbreaker for young men was the statement that Republicans are corrupt and beholden to billionaires. Beyond that concern, there were still notable differences across party identification. Democratic young men expressed significant concern about Republicans enabling Trump to seize new federal powers, suggesting this argument resonates strongly with the Democratic base but has far less traction beyond it. Among Independent and Republican young men, the second most frequently cited reason for not voting Republican was being “out of touch with the working class.” And, quite interestingly, among Republican men themselves, being “too focused on restricting abortion” and “cutting access to health care” ranked as the third and fourth most cited reasons.

Finally, we asked voters to think about the direction they would like a 2028 presidential candidate to take, both on their economic vision and on broader cultural beliefs. By a 55-43% margin, young men overwhelmingly back a presidential candidate whose vision for the country is focused on supporting capitalism with guardrails over one who advocates moving toward socialism. When asked whether they would prefer a candidate who fights for their cultural beliefs—even when those beliefs are not mainstream—or one who compromises and is willing to criticize their own party on cultural and social issues, young men favored the fighter by a 55–42% margin.

These two dynamics signal that young men are not seeking a far-left shift in the economic system, rather economic stability and accountability that protects the working class. They also prefer a leader who is authentic, independent, and has backbone to stand by their beliefs—rather than one who compromises without good reason or conviction.

Conclusion

In this survey, young men send a clear signal that they remain a true swing constituency—one not yet committed to either party over the long term. While high-propensity young men are willing to back Democrats in 2026, the broader young male electorate remains uncertain that Democrats share their values and aspirations or can be trusted to deliver for the working class. Across the board, young men want parties that move toward the center and candidates who are authentic, fight for working people, and are not beholden to powerful interests. This data should serve as a guiding framework for those seeking to engage young men in the years ahead.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on February 10, 2026.

This November, Third Way worked with GBAO to conduct an online survey of 2,000 registered voters1—the third poll in our effort to separate the signal from the noise in the chaotic news environment of Trump 2.0. This research set out to understand which of Trump’s actions have been most salient with voters and which specific arguments were most effective in moving persuadable Trump supporters and Independents away from the President and his party.

What is abundantly evident is the national mood continues to sour. There is a perception that because prices are high and rising, Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have failed to deliver on their economic promises. Voters are most concerned about core weekly and monthly budget items like health care and food costs. And they see a Trump Administration and congressional majority that is more concerned with giving money to the wealthy than helping normal families and workers.

This public opinion research is designed to find out what voters truly care about. It is about separating awareness from salience. Some things that rank high on awareness but low on salience now are the Epstein files, the East Wing renovations, and RFK Jr.’s job performance. Simply put, the stories of the day/week are not what voters are focused on and would not determine their vote if the congressional midterm elections were happening today.

However, Democratic congressional leaders should note that the negative views of their Republican counterparts has not yet created positive views of their performance overall. There are signs of hope in the improving congressional ballot for Democrats and the trust gap on economic issues due to Republicans losing trust. But whether Democrats hold even on the economic trust gap vs. building an advantage on the economy will probably be the difference between a blue trickle or a blue wave in 2026.

Weakening Trump

Voters became more pessimistic about the direction of the country as 2025 went on. In our March poll, 57% of voters thought the country was on the wrong track. By July, that percentage hit 59%. Now, in the November survey, 63% say the country is on the wrong track, which is a six-point increase from the beginning to the end of the year and a steady uptick as time passes.

Trump’s job performance continues to soften as well. In our March poll, his approval rating was 48%. By July, it fell to 45%, and in November, it was further eroded to 43%. From March to November, his approval rating with white, non-college voters has fallen from 62% to 52%, essentially now at a break-even point. Among Trump voters who think things are going worse than expected, his job approval rating is underwater, with only 41% approving.

His approval rating among those who were important new parts of his 2024 coalition continue to erode as well. Among those who consume news less than daily, his approval rating has fallen from 50% in March to 44% in November, which is slightly more than his erosion with those who consume news daily. His approval rating among Latinos stands at 33% and at 50% with young men. Both of these are down two points from July.

In a glass half-full situation, Trump’s approval rating with Independents has not soured since July. The problem for him is that it remained at just 37% in both surveys, a toxic number for a president’s party heading into a midterm election year.

The favorability rating of congressional Republicans and Democrats remains similar and constant from past surveys. Republicans currently have a 42% favorable rating, while Democrats sit at 40%. Democrats only have a 70% favorable rating from Harris voters, while Republicans enjoy a healthier 80% favorable rating from Trump voters. The good news is that Democrats are viewed 19 points better by those who claim they did not vote in 2024, 45% favorable towards Democrats to only 26% favorable towards Republicans. This, combined with Harris voters coming home when it comes to an actual vote, explains the congressional ballot now.

When asked about vote choice heading into 2026, 48% of voters would vote for a Democrat for Congress to only 42% who would vote for a Republican. While Harris voters are less approving of congressional Democrats than Trump voters are of congressional Republicans, the former is more likely to vote for their same party than the latter, with 91% of Harris voters planning to vote Democratic in 2026, compared to only 86% of Trump voters planning to vote Republican in 2026. Congressional Democrats enjoy a 46% to 21% lead among those who claim not to have voted in 2024.

Economic Sirens & Other Issues

Voters think we are headed toward, or already in, a recession. When asked if America is facing the problem of a recession, 57% of voters said yes. This includes 56% of Independents and 58% of non-college voters, and even 40% of Trump voters say so.

But while this economy would probably not be seen as the worst recession in the past half century by any means, the compounding conditions feel unusual. Voters say we are simultaneously experiencing high inflation (84% believe so), that the economy isn’t growing (60%), and that we have increasing unemployment (66%). Independents and non-college voters match those numbers throughout. Trump voters are less likely than everyone else to believe these things are happening, but a large majority (75%) say we are currently facing high inflation, while 46% say there is increasing unemployment, and 40% say the economy isn’t growing.

The most interesting finding is that there is real movement towards Democrats on economic issues. Democrats are tied on the economy now after being six points underwater in our summer survey. Democrats had a three-point lead in the July survey on cost of living and now enjoy an 11-point lead. Handling of inflation has moved slightly from being underwater by two points to now enjoying a one-point lead.

In terms of issue advantages, Democrats are showing signs of promise on economic issues, but now is not the time for a victory lap. When asked which party is better at handling a certain issue, Democrats and Republicans are tied on the economy at 38% apiece. On tariffs, Democrats hold a 41% to 35% advantage. On energy costs, Democrats have a 36% to 30% lead. On inflation, Democrats squeak out a 35% to 34% advantage, and on cost of living, an issue that Democrats struggled with mightily in 2024, Democrats now enjoy a 42% to 31% lead. Yet Democrats are unable to even match their 2026 congressional vote intention on any of these issues.

Democrats also lead on a host of other issues, some of which also hold economic implications. On health care, Democrats hold a large 48% to 28% lead, with an even larger 51% to 24% advantage on Medicaid. Democrats also lead 45% to 26% on Social Security.

Both parties have tried to make stopping political corruption part of their attacks on each other, and voters now narrowly side in favor of Democrats 31% to 26% on that issue. We also tested on issues that Republicans have tried to recently promote but do not appear to be landing. Democrats lead 43% to 32% on freedom of speech and 36% to 26% on political civility.

Where Republicans continue to see advantages is on law-and-order issues. Republicans enjoy a large 53% to 23% lead on border security and still maintain a 47% to 35% advantage on immigration itself. On crime, Republicans have a 42% to 26% advantage, and on national security, they have a 46% to 29% advantage. These were the only four issues where Republicans had voters’ trust, but all were robust leads.

Making voters feel more comfortable with Democrats on economic issues, and closing the margins on security issues, will be critical to move the needle on the congressional vote choice. Republicans losing trust on the economy will not be enough.

Awareness & Salience

It should come as no surprise, but voters say they have heard a lot about the Epstein files (69% a lot/some), ICE raids (86% a lot/some), RFK Jr. saying pregnant women taking Tylenol leads to autism in children (70% a lot/some), and tearing down the East Wing (77% a lot/some). But these issues and their equivalents failed to materialize in a MaxDiff exercise when testing salience and passion.

The top four performing messages in the MaxDiff exercise focused on congressional Republican actions that raised health insurance premiums, spiked electricity bills, cut Medicaid, and cut food assistance in the name of giving tax cuts to billionaires that saddle the country with more debt.¹

One of the most shocking findings is that cuts to food assistance programs was the single most salient issue of the 14 tested messages. While there was no qualitative component, future research could explore the notion that middle-class Americans are seeing how hard it is for them to afford groceries nowadays and have deep sympathy for hard-working families and individuals, especially involving seniors and children, who need more help to get by.

Similarly, a message that combined Medicaid cuts with health care premium increases tested better than a message that just talked about Medicaid cuts and a message that just talked about premium spikes, which could indicate a solidarity to help all Americans struggling to provide for their families in today’s economy. People seem to understand that congressional Republicans have prioritized giving tax cuts to the wealthy over providing economic relief to the rest of the country. While Democrats can’t forget the value of hard work and the need to root out waste and abuse, there is a real opening to defend the social safety net for Americans in need.

On another economic note, all three polls this year have tested tariffs in the MaxDiff exercise. In March, the tariff message was a top four message and did well. By July, it had fallen off thanks to the One Big Beautiful Bill and the whiplash of tariffs being announced and being rescinded. Now, in November, tariffs are starting to rise to the top tier again coming in a strong fifth place as price concerns continue to reign supreme.

The daily chaos and issue of the week messages around RFK Jr., the East Wing, and even the Epstein files fell flat. Asked another way, we also inquired of voters to identify the top issue they wanted their elected leaders to focus on.

The word clouds below show the cost of living crises Americans face. Economy, Health Care, Inflation, and Cost stand out as the four words that rise to the top. Republicans differ, having Immigration as a top four response instead of Health Care, which shows misaligned priorities compared to the rest of the population.

Independents have the same core four as the general population, but People also stands out. Democrats have the same core four as Independents, with Health Care being more prevalent than the general population, but Trump also stands out. One important lesson for Democratic candidates is to listen to Independents on this and talk more about People than Trump, the latter of which just plays to the partisans they already have.

The Shutdown

Voters are relieved that the shutdown is over, but there are real mixed feelings, especially among non-Republicans. This survey happened completely after the shutdown ended, so it should be viewed in that context.

The shutdown itself broke through with 93% of voters saying they heard a lot or some about it. Voters were also more likely to blame Trump and Republicans in Congress for the shutdown than Democrats in Congress. Overall, 42% blamed Trump and Republicans, including 39% of Independents. Only 28% blamed Democrats, including 21% of Independents. That left 27% who blamed both parties equally, including 36% of Independents.

When asked about the eight Democratic senators who struck a deal with Senate Republicans to reopen the government, including to conduct a vote on extending Affordable Care Act subsidies, voters were mixed. By a two-point margin (44% to 41% with rounding), those who said they were planning to vote for Democrats or open to voting for Democrats in 2026 said it was a good compromise. It should be noted that this was asked before the Senate ultimately chose not to extend the ACA subsidies, since only a handful of Republicans supported that bill.

We also asked an open-ended question for non-Republicans to describe the end of the shutdown. One word stood out: Cave. Clearly, for a segment of voters who had strong feelings, the deal was seen as a political mistake.

Conclusion

Across three surveys that Third Way has conducted in 2025 on the topics of what is breaking through to average Americans, the economic conditions Americans face has been the north star of issue salience. President Trump and congressional Republicans have ceded the advantage on these issues they held just one year ago. The question is whether congressional Democrats can fully convince Americans that they will be focused on cost-of-living and not that scandal of the week.

The price of food appears to be a rising issue that can cut across socio-economic groups. Democrats would be smart to focus on food costs. They would also be smart to learn from the shutdown fight that compromise is still a popular sentiment, even among Democrats, but that it must be in service of real wins for people, rather than talking points.

As the calendar changes to 2026, we will continue to examine issue salience and try to find the signal through the noise.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on December 26, 2025.

Takeaways

• Both governors-elect were seen as authentic, credible, and accomplished. People appreciated that they were moms raising their own families in their states and understood what came with that in terms of paying bills and caring about public schools.

• Both were seen as a different type of Democrat, thanks to their moderate, bipartisan credentials and backgrounds in national security and law enforcement.

• Spanberger and Sherrill won on the issues of cost of living and the economy. They also were boosted by education and being seen as mainstream on cultural issues.

• New Jersey was closer than Virginia, in part because Ciattarelli centered his campaign on property taxes (which resonated), while Earle-Sears was focused almost exclusively on transgender issues, which made people tune out.

• Opposing Trump is expected, but voters want much more than saying no to bad things coming from the federal government.

• Voters are looking for executive leaders who can cut through the partisan gridlock and get to work delivering for the people of their state.

  ---

This October, Third Way worked with David Binder Research to conduct two sets of qualboards in the 2025 gubernatorial states of New Jersey and Virginia to understand the mindset of swing voters in this chaotic moment. These boards included people who decided late in 2025 who they would be voting for at the top of the ticket and consisted of individuals who did not vote for the same party in all three of the 2020, 2021, and 2024 elections in their state. The Virginia research was conducted October 22-23, while the New Jersey subset occurred October 27-28.

This research was focused on understanding how Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill were able to win over swing voters in their states and providing a template for Democrats looking ahead to 2026 and beyond.

Unique Candidate Strengths

Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill were both elected to the United States House in the 2018 blue wave midterm that came as a backlash to the first Trump presidency. Both flipped long-held Republican districts in the suburbs and became archetypes of strong, moderate women with national security backgrounds who also showed relatability as mothers.

These qualboards made it clear that among many swing voters, Spanberger and Sherrill’s relatability and likability provided the foundation for any potential support.

In Virginia, voters frequently pointed to Spanberger’s overall temperament to show she is a strong leader. They found that she maintained poise under pressure and admired her steadiness. They liked her background in law enforcement and her work in Congress to secure funding for infrastructure and gun safety legislation.

Sherrill was seen as someone who understands middle- and working-class New Jersey residents. Respondents not only knew that she was a mother, but a mother to four, and said raising her family in New Jersey means she understands what families are going through. Voters said she seemed genuine, steady, and forthright.

Both were seen as moderate, and voters liked their proven track record of bipartisanship.

From the Voters Themselves

Virginia Voters

• “I feel like Spanberger is more calm and more collected. I’ve never really seen her yell or let something rattle her. I feel like she has the people’s best interests at heart, and by people I mean the common people and not the super-rich or the wealthy.”

• “There is a steadiness to Spanberger that I like in my politicians. She rarely comes across as radically excited or frazzled. That is a great quality to have in leadership. It evokes trust.”

• “I would have concerns if any candidate made transgender issues the main focal point of their candidacy. It is an issue of importance and candidates should have clear views, but issues like the economy, law enforcement, education, jobs, and cost of living are more important at this time. I don’t think I would be able to support a candidate that made transgender issues a tentpole policy.”

• “Abigail seems to be center left but not too left. I heard and read that she is part of some caucus that has bipartisan support, working with both with Republicans and Democrats.”

• “I appreciated that Spanberger felt more balanced and level than some other Democratic candidates I’ve seen before.”

• “Spanberger is known for being pragmatic, and both of us share public service having served in the federal government. So she has integrity and public service that we both share. She supports a balanced budget and careful spending which is something my conservative side agrees with.”

New Jersey Voters

• “I really appreciate Sherrill’s focus on fairness and opportunity. I feel that she’s a very practical problem solver. She seems to genuinely care about families, education, and making the state a lot more affordable without getting lost in politics. That stuff just annoys me. I also value her emphasis on integrity and collaboration and doing right versus doing what’s popular.”

• “Sherrill’s speeches stood out to me because she came across very caring, and knowing she’s a mom and seeing her concern for not only her children but ours was very warming.”

• “I do like that she has not been in politics long term and has been in the Navy as a helicopter pilot as well as a mom. She has not been in a political bubble her whole life.”

• “I don’t see Mikie Sherrill as much of a typical member of her party. I think she feels more moderate and more willing to work across the aisle. That’s something that I can appreciate and respect. She talks about practical fixes rather than trying to push a strict party agenda. I think that makes her stand out in a really good way. She seems focused on results not just ’being a Democrat’ for the sake of being a Democrat.”

  ---

Issues Driving Vote Choice

Voters overwhelmingly cited cost of living, the economy, and education as the most important issues in both states, with property taxes also being incredibly important in New Jersey.

In Virginia, these qualboards point to why Spanberger was able to win by a healthy margin. These swing voters viewed her as having better plans than Winsome Earle-Sears on lowering costs, and Spanberger sending her own children to public school gave her credibility that she would actually work to support public education. Crime was a mid-tier issue in Virginia, but Spanberger’s background in law enforcement made her a different type of Democrat, to which voters responded favorably. Spanberger was viewed as more mainstream on cultural issues such as abortion as well. The Earle-Sears campaign tried to make Spanberger appear out of touch on transgender issues, but voters expressed frustration with both parties on that topic. There was a desire to prevent discrimination but also concerns with transgender athletes’ participation in girls’ sports and using girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms. The Earle-Sears campaign’s decision to single out transgender individuals to such an extreme degree ultimately seemed to turn voters off, and it was described by these swing voters as the least important issue the candidates were talking about.

New Jersey ended up being a convincing win for Sherrill but was seen as closer in pre-election polling, and the voters in that state we spoke with showed more difficulty getting to their final decision, in part because Jack Ciattarelli was seen as strong and focused on some economic issues. Voters praised his focus on cutting taxes and making the state more affordable. However, Sherrill’s ability to communicate believable and concrete plans for easing the financial burden of New Jersey residents ultimately won the day. Voters could specifically cite Sherrill’s proposals to provide property tax relief and freeze utility rates. Like in Virginia, New Jersey voters viewed Sherrill as credible on education issues, because her children go to public schools. They could also cite her support to expand after-school programs and tutoring to close the achievement gap. Also, like in Virginia, voters viewed Sherrill as more mainstream on cultural issues such as abortion.

From the Voters Themselves

Virginia Voters

• “I feel that Spanberger holds the Democratic line in education, environmental concerns, and healthcare coverage, and reproductive rights. Her bipartisan record on law enforcement, border control, and rural/farming concerns bring her closer to center. I don’t see many steps toward center from Earle-Sears.”

• “Spanberger runs pretty close to the typical Democratic candidate except when she relies heavily on her law enforcement background. That is a good thing. It gives her credibility and makes her just different enough from many other liberals who lean on reducing law enforcement efforts.”

• “It seems very polarizing, but when it comes to transgender bathrooms and sports - a commonsense approach should guide policies; not politics. So, I agree with both and also disdain both sides for vilifying the issue and making a mountain of a mud-pile.”

• “Spanberger’s messaging has primarily been about central issues and how she has worked with parties on both sides of the aisle to pass bills that work for all. That’s a sign of someone willing to listen and compromise. Her talking points on her website specifically address people across the political spectrum.”

• “I feel that she might compromise more. I feel that she will come up with more solutions vs sticking to a political ideology.”

New Jersey Voters

• “I connect more with Mikie Sherrill’s approach… she seems steady, genuine, and focused on practical issues like cost of living and education instead of just politics… I don’t agree with every stance she takes, but overall, her priorities feel closer to my own values and how I see in New Jersey’s future.”

• “The primary reason I am supporting Sherrill is she is fighting for tax relief and supports a program that I have used in the past called ANCHOR. Plus there are many other things such as lowering energy costs.”

• “I think Mikie is more of a modern-day Democrat. She’s targeting things that are within reach! Because she goes after issues that really exist and that can be fixed! Like lowering energy costs.”

• “Typical candidates make generalized statements. Mikie’s plan has specific examples on how she wants to help NJ. One example from her plan is that she will work to provide financing and assistance to municipalities to help them convert commercial buildings into housing units. She also wants to ensure that all reproductive healthcare services are insurance covered. I also like that she wants to improve the education system with ’high-impact tutoring,’ as well as increased availability for mental health services.”

• “I think Mikie has a better stance on taxes. She wants the money to flow back to the working class. That’s important for me.”

• “There is only one thing about Jack I like, but I agree with Mikie’s plan on ALL the issues.”

  ---

The Impact of Trump

President Trump lost both of these states by six points in 2024. He remains unpopular with these swing voters. It was clear they were more concerned with Earle-Sears and Ciattarelli being too close with the president than they were impressed by Democrats who make opposing Trump their entire argument. Spanberger and Sherrill were seen as striking the right balance. Not surprisingly, voters opposed Trump policies such as tariffs and indiscriminate ICE raids, and in Virginia, DOGE and federal layoffs were especially unpopular. At the same time, they liked that Spanberger and Sherrill rose above the failings of the Trump presidency to provide a proactive vision for moving their respective states forward.

From the Voters Themselves

Virginia Voters

• “I didn’t see Spanberger say - if you don’t like Trump vote for me, and if you like Trump, I’m the enemy. Some candidates have that emotional campaign and run on that only. She tied issues with current policies.”

• “I might have more readily considered Earle-Sears if she didn’t hold so tight to her party line on DOGE and Trump’s policies. They have affected Virginia’s economy.”

New Jersey Voters

• “I think I was on the fence for some time, but despite seeing good points from each side, the main thing that affected my decision making is the fact that Trump has backed up Ciattarelli, which makes it clear to me that Ciattarelli will easily allow the Trump administration to guide him in how to run the state of NJ.”

• “Sherrill seems to have a better plan than Jack. Jack supports the current president and let’s just say right now it’s not going well. She has a plan to have families save money and regain their confidence in this state.”

• “I worry about his strong relationship with President Trump and having his views on reproductive rights, immigration, vaccines and other issues effecting NJ.”

  ---

The Next Four Years

Voters chose Spanberger and Sherrill because they were seen as different types of Democrats who they hope can bridge divides in their state governments like they did in Congress. They are expecting both to get to work and deliver on promises. Some, especially in New Jersey, said that they feel like past governors did not deliver results after promising to improve the cost of living. However, there is hope in both states that these two will be the types of governors who can push through divisiveness to do something good for the people of their states.

From the Voters Themselves

Virginia Voter

• “Focus and follow through with your plan. First focus on the economy and jobs as people are hurting with the cost of living. Then focus on education and healthcare and we do not need to revise all the prior policies the previous governor implemented. No noise or division.”

New Jersey Voter

• “My message to our future Governor would be to be practical. We want all people to be able to work and live. Make it a great state where people have jobs, pay taxes, can send their children to quality schools, and have nice homes or at least live in nice areas. Don’t always look out for the highest earning citizens, look out for those who are working and trying to have a good life.”

  ---

Conclusion

Virginia and New Jersey are light blue states, and Democrats winning the gubernatorial elections while a Republican is in the White House with an upside-down approval rating isn’t a huge shock. However, these elections showed what swing voters are looking for in their leaders. They want candidates who are strong, credible, relatable, mainstream, and not afraid to buck their party’s extremes. Spanberger and Sherrill provided steady leadership for their state parties and serve as a template for those looking for a path for Democrats to start winning again in purple and red places.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on November 7, 2025.

This August, Third Way worked with Global Strategy Group to conduct an online survey of 1,400 registered voters who are likely to vote in a Democratic presidential primary. The purpose was to understand who the people are that will likely determine the next Democratic nominee for president, what they value, and what they want to see in the next Democrat at the top of the ticket. The 2028 primary is still a long way away, but countless hopefuls are already floating trial balloons, and gallons of ink has already been spilled profiling potential 2028 candidates, including their strategies and “lanes.” Too often, a stereotype of primary voters has distorted these conversations, with the most recent case study being 2019, when dozens of hopefuls spent months leapfrogging each other to the left, only to be beat by Biden, who won the nomination by playing for the average voter rather than the likes of social media.

Given the inevitable pressure that will be wielded by advisors, elites, and the loudest activists throughout this process, we believe it is imperative to keep the conversation focused on typical Democratic primary voters, hence this first, early analysis in what will be a series of deep dives into that universe. Many attributes, characteristics, and values emerged from the research. But perhaps the most telling was the extent to which the perspective of most Democratic primary voters diverges from the small subset that’s terminally online.

• The average Democratic primary voter is center-left. Despite the frequent headlines, the party has not been overrun by socialists and the terminally online.

• Democratic primary voters want someone authentic, honest, and accountable, and they want a candidate’s guiding star to be about making progress over ideological purity.

• Voters are looking for a winner, which they believe is someone who is relatable and down-to-earth and hasn’t taken stances that alienate them from the average American.

  ---

Who Are the Likely Democratic Primary Voters?

To understand what Democratic primary voters want, we must first look at who they are. The modal primary voter is a white non-college-educated woman who is over 55 years old and consumes news frequently but doesn’t post much on social media.

The universe of folks who already say they are likely to participate in a 2028 Democratic primary is around 62% female to 38% male. This electorate is also an older one, with 55% of voters being 55 years of age or older. Seniors make up 38% of this electorate; by contrast, those under 30 years of age clock in at only 12% of likely primary voters.

Primary voters on the Democratic side are 66% white and 34% non-white, including 21% Black and 10% Latino. Only 40% have a college degree, while 60% say they do not have a college degree. In all, white college-educated voters make up 29%, compared to 37% for non-college white voters, which means the plurality of likely Democratic primary voters fall in that latter category.

Primary voters on the Democratic side are 66% white and 34% non-white, including 21% Black and 10% Latino. Only 40% have a college degree, while 60% say they do not have a college degree. In all, white college-educated voters make up 29%, compared to 37% for non-college white voters, which means the plurality of likely Democratic primary voters fall in that latter category.

The primary voting universe is one that consumes news but doesn’t frequently post on social media. In terms of news consumption, 67% say they seek out news compared to 33% who say they casually consume news when it comes across their normal daily life. However, that number essentially flips when it comes to posting on social media. Only 21% of primary voters post on social media daily. A near super-majority (64%) say they post monthly or less. In fact, more people never post (31%) than the proportion who post daily.

Daily posters are 20 points more likely to say politics is a very important part of their personal identity than the average primary voter. They are seven points more likely to be “strong” Democrats than the average primary voter. They are seven points more likely to be under 30 years of age than the average primary voter as well.

When asked to describe their ideology among six options, it is clear the primary electorate is still center left:

• 40% described themselves as liberal;

• 33% said they were moderate;

• 11% called themselves progressive;

• Only 5% self-described as “socialist,” the same proportion of primary voters that called themselves conservative.

The socialists and daily posters among this universe diverged from the rest of the electorate as we dove into values, issues, and candidate preferences.

What Do Primary Voters Value?

These Democratic primary voters say the most important values to them personally are honesty (65%), respect (57%), and family (53%).

In terms of what they want to see in elected officials, the values that rise to the top are honesty (76%) and accountability (52%). Honesty is the most important value for liberals, moderates, and conservatives. It is in the top three for progressives but is not viewed as important by self-described socialists. Progressives and socialists value equality and empathy, but the most important value for socialists is justice at 70%. This does not rank in the top six for any other group.¹

When we asked a forced choice question on the role of government, 78% of Democratic primary voters said it was ensuring equality of opportunity over equality of outcomes. Liberals were the most likely to choose opportunity at 85%, and no other group except socialists lagged far behind that watermark. With socialists, the percentage who wanted equality of outcomes was double the general primary electorate at 46%.

When asked about dissatisfaction with the political system, most primary voters showed both frustration and a desire to return to democratic norms, but socialists stood out as different than the rest of the party. In a forced choice question, 93% said that protecting and preserving our democracy and the rule of law is still very important compared to 7% who said democratic norms and rules have gone out the window, and we don’t need to respect them anymore. The outlier group was socialists, who were three times more likely to say we don’t need to respect democratic norms, with 21% choosing that option.

Another issue on which socialists stood out was taxes. Sixty-four percent said the wealthy and corporations should pay more in taxes to fund initiatives to give working people more opportunities for success, compared to 36% who said they should pay more because billionaires shouldn’t exist. The only group to choose the latter option was socialists, who did so at a 66% to 34% margin.

Democratic primary voters also overwhelmingly want to reform capitalism over moving to a socialist system.

• 61% said they would prefer properly regulated capitalism with guardrails to prevent abuse as opposed to 39% who said capitalism has failed and that we need to move toward socialism.

• 74% of moderates and 62% of liberals prefer capitalism.

• Socialists obviously prefer socialism at a rate of 78%.

When asked about a series of key issues, the primary electorate sounded a lot like the median voter—although the socialists and daily social media posters often occupied a different universe.

Democrats value hard work over handouts.

Democratic primary voters prefer expanding tax credits for working people, families with children, and caregivers, while making sure it doesn’t increase inflation, compared to providing direct cash payments to families, by a 65% to 35% margin.

• Moderates clocked in at 70% and liberals at 65% for the former option.

• Socialists split 50% on both.

• Similarly, daily social media posters were split 51% to 49% in favor of the former.

By a huge margin, primary voters want politicians to take on price gouging and tariffs instead of creating government grocery stores. The former option won out 84% to 16%; though, the socialist support for the latter doubles to 34%.

Democrats value jobs with meaning and dignity over a government jobs guarantee.

Primary voters preferred providing more low-cost vocational training and apprenticeship opportunities, compared to implementing a federal universal jobs program, by a 74% to 26% margin.

• Liberals and moderates are both at 77% support for the former.

• Socialists are at 65% support for the latter.

Democratic primary voters want a balanced approach to immigration.

We gave these voters a choice between 1) investing in immigration enforcement that deports convicted criminals but protects eligible, law-abiding immigrants like Dreamers, and provides a path to citizenship or 2) decriminalizing the border and abolishing ICE.

• Democratic primary voters prefer the former 65% to 35%.

• 80% of moderates and 62% of liberals prefer the first option.

• 69% of socialists prefer the latter.

Likely primary voters want rules, not bans, on sports participation.

When asked about transgender individuals being able to participate in sports, we asked a question with three options instead of two to try to get a deeper understanding around this much-discussed issue. Half of respondents (49%) said when it comes to transgender athletes, there should be rules to keep sports fair, but they might be different depending on age, sport, and level of competition. A quarter each (25% in both cases) said transgender individuals should always be allowed to compete or never be allowed to compete in sports other than as their sex assigned at birth. A majority of liberals chose the middle “rules” option, as well as a plurality of both moderates and progressives. A majority of socialists chose always allowing transgender individuals to compete, while a majority of conservatives chose never.

Even in a primary, Democrats support accountable law enforcement.

An area of near-universal agreement among these voters is around the need to increase the number of local police, while also holding them accountable for discrimination and unlawful behavior, which gained 85% support compared to a mere 15% support for defunding the police. Socialists and progressives support for defunding the police stands at nearly double: 29%.

There are still some areas where primary voters are split.

On health care, Medicare for All (M4A) and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are essentially tied in support among Democratic primary voters, with M4A holding a slight 52% to 48% advantage. Moderates support the ACA with 63%. Liberals are more split, at 56% support for M4A, while socialists are united in support of M4A with 83%.

On climate, an all-of-the-above energy strategy narrowly beats the Green New Deal, 53% to 47%. Moderates prefer all-of-the-above at 67%. Liberals narrowly support Green New Deal at 53%, while socialists strongly support the Green New Deal at 74%.

On higher education, an approach focused on improving student outcomes and return on investment ties with an approach focused on cancelling student loan debt and making college free, with 50% each. Moderates prefer the former, with 70% support. Liberals narrowly prefer cancelling debt, with 55% support, while socialists give 92% support to that second option. On this issue, there was a 42-point difference on net in support for debt cancellation between weekly social media posters and those who never post.

On these more 50/50 issues, there is clearly a progressive lane among primary voters, though socialists and frequent posters on social media are well outside the mainstream in this universe. And Democratic primary voters most importantly want to win, and they know these policy positions will be less popular in a general election.

The 2028 Nominee

It was crystal clear in this research: primary voters prefer someone who can get things done over someone who is an ideological warrior.

One area of unity is that all segments of primary voters, even socialists, understand that values are probably more important to making someone electable than ideological purity. Overall, 60% of Democratic primary voters say being authentic, relatable, and down-to-earth makes someone a better candidate, compared to 40% who would rather have one who stands with them on most of the major issues.

By a similar margin, these voters prefer someone who can win the general election against a Republican over someone who stands by progressive values, 61% to 39%. Liberals lead the pack at 70% preferring electability, with moderates not far behind at 63%. On this question, though, the tenth of primary voters who self-describe as progressives are split evenly, with 51% saying they want someone who stands by progressive values. And socialists come in at 57% wanting a progressive over an electable candidate.

In a forced choice between a candidate who works across the aisle to get things done (even if it means compromising) compared to sticking to progressive beliefs (even if it means getting less done), primary voters overwhelmingly choose progress over progressive by a 79% to 21% margin. Among liberals and moderates, an identical 84% choose making progress, as did 65% of progressives. Among socialists, by contrast, 66% pick sticking to progressive beliefs, even if it means getting less done.

A follow-up series of open-ended questions fleshed out what’s driving these quantitative answers. Democratic primary voters are keenly aware of their need to win this election. One even went so far as to say that “it is imperative that we win the election this time. If we don’t, there will no longer be an America for us to save.”

Another voter summed up the tension many seem to be juggling in this group. They want a fighter, no doubt. This voter said we needed someone to “challenge President Trump, his statements online and in person. Chaotic tariffs should be met with holding his feet to the fire.” At the very same time, this voter also said, “We just need to not go too far left. Moderation is key.” Democratic primary voters want a fighter who can appeal to the broad coalition the party needs to beat MAGA in 2028.

Conclusion

In this survey, Democratic primary voters are giving us a clear picture of what they want in a 2028 nominee. They want a candidate who is accountable to the people. One that will focus on lowering costs and creating more economic opportunity. They want a candidate who is committed to making progress over defending ideology, and someone who can win. The socialists and the terminally online are the outliers in this coalition, and that should be a guiding star in understanding who will determine the next Democratic nominee for president.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on September 30, 2025.

This month, Third Way worked with GBAO to conduct an online survey of 2,000 registered voters1—the second poll in our effort to separate the signal from the noise in the chaotic news environment of Trump 2.0. This research set out to understand which of Trump’s actions have been most salient with voters and which specific arguments were most effective in moving persuadable Trump supporters and Independents.

Americans are getting less optimistic about the state of the country, and nothing that congressional Republicans or President Trump have done this summer has appeared to help calm people’s nerves and frustration. Right now, opposition to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB) is driving intense opposition and dwarfing other issues. We tested 16 statements on the OBBB, and three tested the best by a large margin.

• Republicans slashed $1 trillion from Medicaid, threatening health care for children, people with disabilities, and hard-working people who can’t otherwise afford health insurance.

• Republicans voted to bankrupt America with more than $3 trillion in new national debt and bankrupt Americans by taking away their health insurance and raising electricity prices, all to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.

• Republicans passed devastating cuts to Medicaid that could shut down the rural hospitals that rely on those funds to operate, threatening lifesaving care for Americans living in communities far from big cities.

It should be noted that this poll was drafted and programmed before the issue of the Jeffrey Epstein files broke into congressional debates and reentered the American consciousness. As others do research that includes that topic, this guidance should be seen as complementary rather than in opposition if others find that is breaking through.

Americans are Losing Hope

The first poll in this series was conducted in March of 2025. Back then, voters said by a 15-point margin that the country was on the wrong track. That sentiment has only worsened over the summer. It’s now -18, with 59% saying that the country is on the wrong track, compared to 41% who say we’re on the right track. Even 24% of voters who pulled the lever for Trump now say things are on the wrong track, consistent with the 22% that said so in the spring, which shows that the fury of executive orders and legislative action has done little to calm the nerves of those feeling unhappy.

This unease translates to how Americans feel about their leaders as well. The President’s approval rating has plummeted from -2 points in March to -10 points in July. Just 45% of Americans think he is doing a good job. While there is no statistically significant difference between that number and his favorability rating, this poll does maintain the pattern that Trump’s personal favorable ratings are slightly worse than his job approval rating, clocking in at -12 points.

As bad as Trump’s numbers are, the Democratic and Republican parties are in worse shape. Republicans overall and Republicans in Congress are both at -14 points, which is a slide from -6 in the spring (when the poll asked only about the party). Democrats have backslid a bit, from -14 in the spring to -17 now. Though, it should be noted that Democrats are less unpopular with those who didn’t vote in 2024 but could vote in future elections (-17 points compared to -36 for Republicans). The main difference is that Harris voters have fewer good feelings about the Democratic Party (+42 points) compared to Trump voters who like the Republican Party by a 59-point margin.

When asked if things are going better or worse in Trump’s second term as expected, 41% say worse, and 26% say better. This is a wider spread than the 40/30 we found in the spring. Notably, the movement isn’t from Independents but from Trump voters who have gone from 57% better/9% worse in the spring to 50% better/14% worse today, a 12-point decrease. Among Independents, those finding things worse than expected hasn’t moved (42% then, 43% today), but those saying things are better than their expectations have decreased from 24% to 19%.

Congressional Republicans are struggling in the public eye. When asked about attributes, 60% said the phrase “cares about people” does not describe them well, while 61% said “have the wrong priorities” does describe them well, and 56% agreed that “corrupt” describes them well. Even 27% of people who voted for Trump in 2024 thought congressional Republicans were corrupt.

Republicans’ Big Beautiful Blunder

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act has broken through to the majority of American voters. Overall, 72% of voters have heard “a great deal” or “some” about the legislation, with 28% saying they heard a little or nothing about it. Perhaps surprisingly, 69% of Independents say they have heard “a lot” or “some” about the legislation, meaning that it is breaking through to nonpartisans in a convincing manner relative to their partisan counterparts. By a 10-point margin, people aren’t fans, with only 42% saying they approve.

Independents don’t like the bill at all, with only 32% approving while 57% disapprove. Harris voters hate it (90% disapprove), while Trump voters break 81% in favor to 15% opposed. Among those who currently approve of Trump’s job performance, support of the bill is 87% in favor to 8% in opposition. While Trump voters who don’t currently approve of Trump are a small group, further research on them would be warranted. and this finding could point to the Trump Administration’s current actions being insufficient or counterproductive to bring these folks back into the fold.

The intensity of the opposition is more pronounced than support is, with 37% saying they strongly oppose the bill, compared to only 16% who say they strongly support it. There is no difference in voter reaction between calling it a Republican bill or Trump’s bill, so given that Trump is not on the ballot in 2026, the new law should be framed as the work of congressional Republicans to make them own it directly.

In a MaxDiff exercise, our poll tested many actions that congressional Republicans are taking or failing to take, and components of this bill proved important to respondents. For instance, cuts to Medicaid were the number one item raising concerns about congressional Republicans. This was by far the most impactful issue for Independents and non-college voters. It was also narrowly the best-testing message among Trump voters.

Clocking in second was the idea that the bill adds trillions to the national debt, hurting Americans in order to give tax breaks to billionaires. This did relatively well with Trump voters, who ranked it almost as high as the Medicaid cuts. The third and fourth best-testing messages also focused on components of the bill, including the impact on rural hospital cuts and food assistance cuts.

Arguments around congressional Republicans allowing corruption to flourish in the White House, not holding town halls, funding harsh immigration enforcement efforts, and supporting tariffs didn’t test as highly. A similar tariff message was one of the best-performing in our poll earlier this spring, which shows that while Americans may still oppose tariffs, they have fallen in salience over the summer amid concerns around the budget bill.

Overall, when asked which aspect of the bill is the most concerning, a plurality of all voters, Independents, and non-college voters said cuts to Medicaid and kicking millions off their health coverage worried them the most. However, among Trump voters, a plurality said they were most concerned about increasing the national debt.

In the MaxDiff exercise, the one message not explicitly about the budget bill that ranked highly was the idea that Republicans always cave to Trump, changing their positions even if it will have negative consequences for the American people.

Take The Fight to Republicans

Voters’ concerns about the budget bill are helping to give Democrats a credibility advantage on a handful of key issues and spotlight the issues that work best.

When asked which party voters trust more on the issues, Democrats have large advantages on health care (50% to 29%) and Medicaid (52% to 28%). Even among Trump voters, only 56% said they trusted Republicans more than Democrats on Medicaid.

Republicans have also seen erosion in their advantages on economic issues, with our poll finding Democrats now up three points on the cost of living and Republicans only up two points on inflation and six points on the economy overall. Democrats have a four-point advantage on energy issues.

On the culture war issues that Trump likes to highlight, voters are split. Republicans maintain a 1o-point advantage on immigration, which ballons to 31 points when it comes to border security. Democrats have a 38-point advantage on LGBT issues, but that slightly contracts to 25 points on transgender issues.

Our survey also tested potential policy framing for Democrats. We asked voters to rank agreement on a scale of 0 to 10 in terms of support, with all scores at six or above considered supporting. There was little difference in partisan support among them.

• Rewarding working people by letting them keep their money while ending tax breaks for billionaires and corporations (8.3 mean score, 85% support).

• Banning members of Congress from trading individual stocks (8.3 mean score, 83% support).

• Eliminating taxes on Social Security benefits and making the wealthiest pay their fair share into the system (8.3 mean score, 84% support).

• Strengthening disclosure and conflict of interest laws (8.4 mean score, 84% support).

Two of these four policy prescriptions people responded best to were focused on accountability, namely banning individual stock transactions and strengthening disclosure and conflict of interest laws. However, in the MaxDiff exercise, it is purely budget issues that rise to the top. It seems to signal that while voters will always want to see strong accountability measures, right now, they are most intensely focused on the budget cuts, especially Medicaid cuts. It speaks to the potential benefits of keeping some of the evergreen anti-corruption red meat in messages that are linked to the economic hits that land so well here.

Conclusion

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act will be one of the Republicans’ signature actions of this Congress. It is unpopular: voters see it as hurting those struggling to pay their bills to provide tax breaks for the wealthy. As Congress heads home for August recess, congressional Republicans could see real backlash. This presents an opportunity for Democrats but only if they stay on message and don’t miss the signal for the noise.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on August 1, 2025.

Donald Trump made significant inroads with young men in 2024. According to the data firm Catalist, Democratic support among young men, 18-to-29-years-old, dropped from 55% in 2020 to 46% in 2024, an 18-point net swing towards Trump, with even more acute swings among young men of color going back to 2012. To truly understand these trends and begin winning these voters back, Democrats must engage in difficult but necessary conversations about what has caused this chasm to open between young men and the Democratic Party on the economy, culture, and identity.

In focus groups from last fall, Biden 2020-Trump 2024 voting young men told pollsters that they felt that Trump “doesn’t hate people like me… whereas the Democratic Party has somehow become the anti-male party,” and that “the Harris campaign kind of abandoned young men.” This sentiment isn’t simply an economic-driven argument, nor is it explicitly sexist—believing that it is ignores an underlying problem with how young men perceive Democrats today. To further analyze why young men have moved away from Democrats and what they must do to win them back, Third Way and HIT Strategies conducted three focus groups with soft Trump supporting young Black, Latino, and non-college white men, 18-to-29-years-old, from the seven presidential battleground states. These young men were overwhelmingly less ideological, lower propensity and low political news consumption voters. The findings should give pause to anyone who wants to beat back the MAGA forces.

1. What Got Us Here

For many, the 2024 election was the perfect storm of economic pain, cultural alienation, and distrust in the Democratic Party building up and converging at once—this was especially true for young men.

Economic Pain & Expectations

Above all else, the young men in our focus groups have been feeling an economic burden that has not been meaningfully addressed—affording everyday life, getting a good-paying job to provide for their family, and being able to do better than their parents. They feel economic expectations are stacked against them as young men, especially as fewer men enroll in college compared with women—something they attribute to a lack of support from their families and communities, which often pushes them into blue collar work. Those circumstances and expectations have led to feelings of resentment and hopelessness.

Affordability and Being a Provider

Additionally, the stress over their day-to-day economic circumstances caused some of the young men in our focus groups to feel they were less viable partners when dating—not being able to afford the cost of nice dates—and, among those who had families, it created an added stress and frustration about not being able to fulfill their roles as the traditional head of their household.

“Most women look at us as… a provider or somebody that can protect them. So, when you do go out, I’m not saying all women, but most women are looking at what you can afford. And with [the] rising price of things, it’s not as easy to afford.” – Young Latino Man

“I joined the union to be a plumber. That was almost a year ago. I still haven’t been… I’m a caretaker because of that. Like, I had to go into a different field of work…I’m a married man. I have a son. Like, I have people to support.” – Young Black Man

Masculinity In the Parties

When asked which party they felt best represented men’s priorities, these men overwhelmingly pointed to the Republican Party. And when they were asked to describe what those priorities were, it became readily clear that these young men view masculinity through a prism of their faith, financial independence, and a commitment to upholding family values—protecting, leading, and supporting a family—none of which they saw represented in the current Democratic Party. Each of the groups struggled to name masculine leaders within the Democratic Party, outside of Barack Obama.

Perceptions of Vice President Harris and Democrats

Most importantly, these young men don’t feel that Democrats understand or speak about their economic concerns. Few of the young men in these groups could name a policy that Kamala Harris ran on last year or describe what her vision for the country was. However, what did stick with them were Trump’s attacks on transgender issues and immigration, and a perception that the Democratic Party is culturally alienating and failing to address their economic struggles. The groups widely shared the belief that Democrats are out of the mainstream on social and cultural issues, and they felt that when they share their opinions on these issues, they are pushed away and looked down upon by those on the left—a sentiment that has been shared by former Democratic voters who lean more culturally moderate and conservative.

President Trump’s Vision

The young men in these groups found that Trump and his vision for the country was above all else focused on their key issues, namely the economy. Every group brought up “no taxes on tips,” highlighting the salience of the economic policy with a concise slogan. Several participants found Trump to be more palatable than in prior election cycles, with many seeing his cultural rhetoric coded as “family values.” The young Black men were generally positive about Trump’s vision and name checked several of Trump’s economic promises, including no taxes on tips and tariffs, as did the young Latino men who were supportive of Trump closing the border and deporting undocumented immigrants.

Information Ecosystem

When asked about their news sources and digital consumption habits, and how that may have influenced their votes, it became readily clear that Democrats simply failed to reach many of these young men in digital spaces where they were more open to receiving information. When they did see ads on Harris, they didn’t find them to be persuasive and immediately tuned them out—expressing a sentiment that they heard more from the campaign via an endless avalanche of commercials than they did from Harris herself.

Interestingly, when we gauged the groups about where they would place several notable podcasters on a conservative-liberal ideological scale, most of the young men placed Joe Rogan and Theo Von in the moderate category, while clearly distinguishing other streamers, such as Adin Ross, as explicitly conservative. And while these groups were generally less trusting of any one podcaster or news source, some admitted that they were more likely to believe seemingly organic content on social media merely because of how often they would see it in their feeds.

Pandering

The Black and Latino young men brought up how they felt that the Harris campaign, and Democrats at large, have become pandering to their communities while not actually addressing their real-life concerns.

2. Current Landscape on Trump’s Performance

While the young men in our focus groups did indeed vote for Donald Trump, their support for him in this moment is lukewarm, with serious concerns about Trump’s handling of the economy and tariffs.

Tariffs and Manufacturing

Many of the young men feel that Trump is following through on tariffs as a campaign promise, but they’re unhappy with how he has gone about implementing them and failing to bring prices down. Several are feeling the pain in their day-to-day lives, but most of the young men across the groups are willing to take a wait-and-see approach to see how Trump’s policies pan out. Interestingly, almost none of these young men could see themselves working the manufacturing jobs that Trump sought to bring back with tariffs, but they supported efforts to re-introduce those male-coded jobs.

Deportations & Due Process

Many of the young men in these groups were particularly uncomfortable with Trump’s deportation of immigrants without due process to El Salvadoran prisons. Others deflected that several of Trump’s measures are necessitated from a broken immigration system perpetuated by both parties. Even though these groups were conducted before more aggressive ICE raids began in early June, there was already notable concern about the federal government deporting non-violent immigrants who had been in their communities for years and mistakenly deporting innocent people without due process and a proper trial.

3. Looking Forward

The final component of these groups sought to understand what young men are looking for in their leaders and if they could ever see themselves voting for a Democratic presidential candidate in future elections.

Leadership Qualities

Similar to what these young men found appealing about Donald Trump, they described wanting leaders who are authentic, straight-shooting, and unafraid to take risks—not reading off of talking points or playing it safe.

Future Democratic Leaders

The groups were shown clips of Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro speaking with Stephen A. Smith about his administration’s efforts to hire government employees who do not have a college degree; Maryland Governor Wes Moore discussing the importance of investing in men and boys and the challenges they’ve faced in recent years; and former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg speaking with Andrew Schultz about the cultural dynamic of Democrats needing to be tolerant of those with differing views in order to persuade them.

The participants gravitated towards each of the clips for distinct reasons: Shapiro’s focus on non-college employee opportunities; Moore’s genuine care and interest in creating economic opportunity for young men; Buttigieg’s authenticity and his approach to having a decent civil discourse with conservatives. However, there was doubt among the participants that the Democratic Party’s base would ever tolerate some of these approaches, particularly Shapiro’s policy on non-college workers and Buttigieg’s heterodoxic approach to expanding the tent.

Conclusion & Guidance

To retake power, Democrats need a long-term plan to rebrand the party as one that is trusted to handle voters’ highest priority issues, that is mainstream on culture, and that is laser focused on implementing an aspirational economic agenda. Democrats continue to have a significant challenge on their hands to reverse their slippage with young men, but there are real and tangible actions that they can take to be proactive in the leadup to 2026 and 2028:

Offer an Aspirational Working-Class Economic Agenda

It became readily clear across each of these groups that these young men are looking for Democratic leaders who are zeroed in on economic policy and getting the party focused on representing working-class people. They felt that their economic concerns were especially heard when young men’s struggles were addressed directly and in an authentic manner, particularly when it came to being providers for their families. Ultimately, young men are looking for an aspirational working-class economic agenda that is clear, concise, and does not get bogged down in policy wonkiness (three-word slogans have proven to resonate cycle after cycle).

Aim Mainstream On Culture

Republicans will continue to weaponize immigration and LGBT issues in future elections to push culturally-moderate young men away from Democrats, whether for personal or religious reasons—and there is a cross section of voters where this component will be just as salient as any economic vision that Democrats offer. Sidestepping and being silent on these cultural wedge issues guarantees political disaster when the GOP’s attacks come. Candidates would do well to get out ahead of GOP attacks, and they can do so without throwing anyone under the proverbial bus (for instance, we have written extensively on how Democrats can take mainstream approaches on transgender issues and immigration). Equally as important is approaching conversations on culture with openness and less judgement, as this breaks the perception of a ‘typical Democrat’ in the minds of many young men.

Take Advantage of Trump’s Lapses

While some of these young men are still drawn to Trump and the Republican Party, most are persuadable swing voters who dislike significant aspects of Trump’s actions so far in his second term. Continuing to highlight the most unpopular aspects of Trump’s and the Republican Party’s agenda is crucial to chipping away at the GOP’s support with young men, including the chaos around tariffs, failing to lower costs, and the Trump administration’s radical actions on immigration.

Chaotic, worse than expected, incompetent. Voters are rattled by President Donald Trump’s first months in office. Despite his approval rating holding steady in the initial ask, many that approve of Trump are skeptical over his opening actions and said they didn’t approve of his performance after hearing messaging that focuses on their daily lives like the economy, health care, tariffs, and privacy.

Third Way with GBAO conducted an online survey of 2,000 registered voters from March 17 to 23, 2025.1 Our goal of the survey was to separate the signal from the noise in what has been a chaotic news environment in Trump’s first several months in office. This poll set out to understand which of Trump’s actions were most salient with voters and what specific messages were most effective in moving Trump supporters, Independents, and non-college voters—a set of voters that can overlap. To see some highlights and charts from the poll, view the accompanying slide deck.

Here are our key takeaways:

• Voters’ pessimism is increasing, particularly on the economy.

• Roughly 14% of 2024 Trump voters are soft and movable.

• Trump is most vulnerable on breaking his promises on costs and the state of the economy for the middle class.

• A defense of government programs must focus on specific, popular items like cancer research, veterans’ programs, Social Security benefits and staffing, nuclear energy safety, and other tangibles.

• Elon Musk is box office poison.

• Digital privacy and giving Musk and DOGE access to government data is a possible sleeper issue.

Our survey was conducted before Trump’s April 2nd tariff announcement and the initial negative market reaction. Tariffs already had high salience in our poll; we expect that salience has grown. We would recommend those looking at future research on this topic look at what worked in this poll and incorporate it, knowing that it will undoubtably poll higher in April than it did in March.

The Mood: Increasingly Pessimistic and Skeptical

Voters were pessimistic in November 2024, which contributed to Trump’s victory. This pessimism persists today. When asked if “things in the United States are going in the right direction, or do you feel things have gotten pretty seriously off on the wrong track,” by a 57-43% margin, voters said things were on the wrong track. It was -33 points among independents and -11 points among non-college voters of all races and genders. Remarkably, even 22% of Trump voters felt things were on the wrong track.

Donald Trump’s ratings remain respectable given his historic unpopularity but are already underwater—a rarity among recently inaugurated presidents. Trump’s favorable/unfavorable is 48-51%. Among independents, his favorability stands at -15 points, or 41-56%. His job approval rating is nearly identical, a 48-50% approve/disapprove among all voters; 42-56% among Independents. Among non-college voters, Trump’s approval rating stands at a barely positive 52%.

When asked about the first months of Trump’s presidency, a 40% plurality say Trump has performed worse than expected, compared to 30% who said he has performed better than expected. Among Independents, the better/worse/same ratio was 24-42-32%. One-in-ten Trump voters said he has performed worse than their expectations, with the better/worse/same ratio at 57-9-32%.

Voters’ souring mood toward Trump could be attributed to one word: chaos. When asked if certain words or phrases accurately described Trump, “chaotic” handily topped the list with 62% of voters saying it adequately described him. There is still a reservoir of support for Trump, and a majority of voters describe him as “strong” (56%) and “patriotic” (54%). Trump did not score favorably in any other positive category. Voters were evenly split on whether “incompetent” described Trump well, but in a potentially worrying sign, 11% of Trump voters said it described him very or somewhat well.

Trump’s 2024 campaign was premised on the question of which candidate would provide order and which would bring chaos. Now, Trump is clearly viewed as chaotic, thanks to his bizarre and haphazard approaches to both the economy and fixing government.

As the recent Wisconsin judge race showed, Elon Musk is unliked and is a drag on Trump. Musk has a -16 net favorable rating among all voters. Twenty percent of Trump voters now hold a negative view of Musk, compared to 12% for JD Vance and 7% for Donald Trump.

Musk’s unfavorability has bled into the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, which is unpopular with 39% of voters viewing it favorably to 50% who view it unfavorably. Normally, government reform efforts are popular, but the chaotic nature of the reforms, some of the incompetence in the implementation, and Elon Musk’s outsized association with this effort, we surmise has led to making this a broad public relations failure.

Trump’s Early Actions Are Mostly Unpopular

Many, but not all, of Trump’s early executive actions are unpopular.

Before a dive into what is unpopular, it is important to understand what voters haven’t soured on. The mass deportation of 11 million undocumented immigrants appears to be the single most popular thing Trump has done so far. That has the approval of 54% of voters to 43% who disapprove. Of the 20 messages tested, it was the only one with net positive approval and cleared that threshold by enough to be more popular than Trump himself by several percentage points. Trump’s own voters wildly approve of the deportations with 87% saying they approve.

The executive orders we tested on transgender people (erasing all mentions of transgender people from federal documents) and banning DEI programs in government and encouraging the same for the private sector were both moderately unpopular. This likely reflected some of the same problems the Biden Administration had on both issues: voters want Washington to focus on things of greater importance to them and a belief that both parties listen to the ideological extremes on these matters.

The early Trump actions that score as most unpopular either hit close to home for voters or fail a morality or competency test. These are the messages that are breaking through to voters as things they either have heard about and don’t like, or if they hear more about, it will turn them against Trump.

• Cutting cancer research funding is -66 among all voters, -80 among Independents, and -77 among voters who shift towards disapproval over the course of the survey.

• Medicaid cuts are -44 among all voters, -56 with Independents, and only +4 with Trump voters.

• Cutting jobs from VA hospitals and freezing funding for veterans’ health care facilities is -51 among all voters but were especially unpopular with non-college voters at -57, which was one of the few things tested less popular with non-college voter than voters as a whole.

• Cutting taxes for billionaires and corporations is -40 with all voters, -51 with Independents, though +10 with Trump voters.

• Removing price caps on prescription drugs is -37 with all voters, -50 with Independents, and only +5 with Trump voters.

• Tariffs are -22 with all voters, -36 with Independents, though +45 with Trump voters (poll taken before April 2nd).

• Spending cuts aimed at funding for things like cancer research (-66), veterans’ health (-51), and nuclear safety (-43) scored poorly for Trump.

• Independents were especially concerned with firing nuclear national security specialists who kept radioactive materials contained so they didn’t explode or leak and viewed that as 21 points more negative than all voters.

• And finally, anything that seemed associated with or benefited Elon Musk was unpopular. Musk’s access to personal federal records was particularly disliked by Independents (-49), as well as measures that seemed to help Musk’s businesses and hurt his competitors (-60).

The Top Messages to Move Trump-Sympathetic Voters

Just because something is unpopular doesn’t mean it will break through with voters.

We tested 17 unique messages, paying particular attention to how salient they were in moving Independents, non-college voters, and those who voted for Trump in 2024. Each of the top four messages hit close to home: two on the economy, one on safety, and one on data privacy, which may be a sleeper issue for Independents and soft Trump supporters.

Overall, what appeared to work was the notion that Trump broke his promise to focus on the economy. Voters feel that right now, he has the wrong priorities, and his chaotic choices are making them poorer and more vulnerable to disease and disaster.

By far, the top message centered on prices and the economy:

“Trump promised he would lower prices and cut taxes for ordinary Americans, but his policies are leading to rising prices and plummeting retirement accounts, and they risk pushing the US into a recession.”

This message tested best overall and was most persuasive with 2024 Trump voters, independents, non-college voters, and voters who shifted towards viewing Trump more unfavorably during the course of the survey.

The second-best testing message was on safety:

“Trump is firing highly skilled government employees who keep us safe from diseases, nuclear accidents, and natural disasters. American families will be left sicker, weaker, and more vulnerable when the next disaster strikes.”

It was the second most persuasive message among those whose opinions shifted more unfavorably toward Trump during the course of the survey.

The third-best testing message hit on digital privacy:

“With Trump’s support, Elon Musk has broken all government privacy rules and has scoured our personal data, including every person’s IRS records, Social Security benefits, and health records through Medicare and Medicaid, putting all of our personal private data in his hands and at risk.”

Non-college voters (second) and Independents (third) found this most persuasive.

And the fourth-best testing message focused on tariffs:

“Trump’s unpredictable actions on tariffs are already hurting the economy. Businesses are pulling back from hiring, prices keep rising, stock markets are declining, and millions of Americans’ retirement security is at risk.”

This ranked number two among Trump voters and third among voters who soured on Trump over the course of the survey. Tariffs have likely risen in salience since the survey was taken.

None of the other 13 messages came close to the top four: bullying, lack of empathy, being erratic, Greenland, angering allies, enriching himself and billionaires, punishing his enemies, etc. all failed the persuasion test. It should be noted that the poll found that attacking Trump on giving tax cuts to billionaires and corporations tested strongly in the issue battery above, but Trump enriching himself and his billionaire supporters didn’t poll as well in the MaxDiff exercise, which is an important distinction.

Conclusion

Democrats have a historic and almost unprecedented opportunity to flip what appeared to be Trump’s strongest selling point into his chief liability on all things economic if Democrats separate the signal from the noise, use the right messages, avoid the wrong ones, and are relentless.

By the end of the survey, Trump’s job approval went from -2 to -13. As expected, all of that was losing people who either voted for Trump or were sympathetic to him. The groups that moved the most were younger people, non-college voters, and women. The Trump Administration creates a lot of noise, but the economy, costs, tariffs, safety, and digital privacy cut through the clutter. And again, this poll was conducted before Trump’s April 2nd tariff policies were announced, so tariffs are probably even more salient and unpopular today than when this poll was conducted.

The economy once was Trump’s superpower. Voters accepted his antics to get a better standard of living and a more secure border. Now the economy is becoming his kryptonite if Democrats deploy their messages right.

This memo was originally published on Third Way on April 10, 2025.

It would be an understatement to say that Democrats did not get the result they wanted in the 2024 election. Heading into Election Day, most prognosticators, pollsters, and experts saw the election as extremely close, which was true to form with one of the smallest polling errors in swing states in recent memory. But ultimately, voters across nearly every demographic and geography shifted to the right enough to hand Trump a clear victory and a majority in both the House and Senate.

To gain a better understanding of what happened and where Democrats must go from here to defeat the MAGA forces that will now control every lever of government in Washington, Third Way partnered with Global Strategy Group to field a post-election survey of voters in Presidential battleground states.1 In it, we aimed to understand what message voters were sending to Democrats in 2024, and how the party might address those concerns and reassemble a solid coalition to win in future cycles.

Who Voters Trusted on the Issues

Let’s start with the simplest explanation for the top of the ticket results: by the time Americans cast their ballots, Donald Trump had built up large leads with voters on who they trusted to handle the issues that were the most important to them.

In our poll, voters said they trusted Trump more than Harris on border security by 21 points (60% to 39%), crime by 11 points (55% to 44%), the economy by 9 points (54% to 45%), and the cost of living by 8 points (54% to 46%). It’s hard to imagine how a candidate can win when voters say they prefer their opponent by wide margins on the issues that have topped every priority list all cycle. Among persuadable voters (those who said they considered voting for both Harris and Trump), Harris suffered a punishing disadvantage on the economy at 24% to 75% for Trump (a 51-point deficit) and on cost of living at 30% to 67% for Trump (a deficit of 37 points). Even worse were the numbers on crime and border security, where less than one-fifth of persuadable voters trusted Harris over Trump. With crime, 18% of persuadable voters trusted Harris to 81% for Trump, and with border security, it was just 13% for Harris to 86% for Trump.

Latino voters generally trusted Harris more than Trump on every issue, but one stood out as particularly strong for him and likely helped contribute to his gains among the group. On border security, Latinos only trusted Harris more by a 54% to 45% margin, which was Harris’ only single-digit advantage with Latino voters. In fact, Latinos trusted Trump more on border security than on any other issue we tested.

The two issues that saw the nominees basically tied are ones that will befuddle Democrats. On Social Security and Medicare, the candidates tied at 49% each, and on threats to democracy, Trump negligibly beat out Harris 50% to 49%. The only two issues on which Harris sported an advantage were abortion (53% to 45%) and climate change (53% to 43%).

When it came to college-educated white voters, a mainstay of the current Democratic coalition, they trusted Harris 13-points more on abortion, 11-points more on threats to democracy, and 10-points more on climate change than the general population, but they only rated her five points better on the economy and crime and seven points better than all voters on cost of living and border security. It would be fair to suppose that college-educated white voters saw Harris as representing their cultural values, but they were still timid in their trust on pocketbook and safety issues.

Heading into the election, Harris tried valiantly to present herself as the candidate of change moving past the Trump era of electoral politics. However, when voters were asked if Harris represented a change or more of the same, they overwhelmingly said “more of the same” by a 21-point margin (39% to 60%). For persuadable voters, that margin increased to 48 points, with 73% saying Harris represented more of the same and only 25% saying she represented change. In a moment where the electorate was dissatisfied with the status quo, this perception alone might have been enough to doom the Vice President’s chances.

Ideology & Which Party Was “Extreme”

The American electorate has long leaned more conservative than liberal, with a plurality of voters describing themselves as moderate. This ideological asymmetry means that Democratic presidential campaigns can only win if they woo a supermajority of moderate voters.

Aligning with this longstanding electoral fact, respondents in our poll self-identified as 42% moderate, 35% conservative, and 23% liberal. Democrats were evenly split, with 47% calling themselves liberal and 47% moderate, while Republicans broke towards their ideological base, with 67% calling themselves conservative and 33% calling themselves moderate. A supermajority (63%) of Independents considered themselves to be moderate, with conservatives and liberals each representing under 20% in that group. Not surprisingly, over 90% of liberals voted for Harris and over 90% of conservatives voted for Trump. But that means Trump started with a big lead, given that there are simply more conservative voters than liberals in America. Harris did win moderates, but only by a 10-point margin—52% to 42%. That simply wasn’t enough to win an election as a Democrat in this center-right country.

On the ideological breakdown, educational attainment among white voters made a big difference. White voters with a college degree reported themselves to be plurality moderate at 43%, but the rest were equal parts conservative (30%) and liberal (27%). However, white voters without a college degree were much further to the right. A plurality called themselves moderate in this group as well, at 42%, but the remainder broke 40% conservative to only 18% liberal.

Latinos clocked in at even more moderate than the general population (47% compared to 42% for the latter), though a bigger chunk of non-moderates described themselves as liberal (31%) than conservative (20%). Voters who considered voting for both Harris and Trump were about 20 points more moderate than the general population, coming in at 62% moderate, 11% liberal, and 25% conservative.

To gain a deeper understanding of these ideological currents, we also asked voters to place themselves, Harris, and Trump on a scale from o to 10—with 0 being completely liberal and 10 being completely conservative. The mean response for Harris was 2.45, while the mean response for Trump was 7.78, indicating that both were viewed about as far away from the middle (5) with Trump being 0.23 points further off-center than Harris. However, voters mapped themselves at a slightly right of center 5.63. That means Harris was perceived as 3.18 points to the left of how voters viewed themselves, compared to Trump being perceived as 2.15 points to the right. While a one-point difference may not seem significant, these ratings are like a Richter scale, so when voters put themselves that much closer to Trump, it’s an indication of a real problem for Democrats.

When asked to describe the candidates at the top of the ticket in a word or two in an open-ended question, this ideological gap became even more obvious. In their own words, voters described Harris as smart, qualified, and intelligent—but the word that predominated was “liberal.” For Trump, “strong” and “leader” were the most cited descriptions. Among key voter groups like persuadables, late deciders, ticket splitters, and low-propensity voters, the word “liberal” was even more prominent when describing the Vice President.

According to our data, Trump came out of Election Day with better favorable ratings, which appears to be a reversal from most preelection polls. In this post-election survey, voters were split nearly evenly in their opinions of Trump (48% favorable to 50% unfavorable) compared to Harris at negative six net favorability (46% to 52%). One thing that is clear though is that Harris and the Democratic brand were in sync in the minds of voters in a way that Trump and the Republican brand weren’t. Views of the Democrats in Congress were at negative seven favorability (44% to 51%), which was identical to Harris. However, Republicans in Congress were significantly less popular than Trump coming in at negative eight favorability (43% to 51%)—a six-point difference in Trump’s favor.

White voters with a college degree viewed Harris slightly better than the general population, with 48% favorable to 50% unfavorable opinions. Unsurprisingly, they viewed Trump much less favorably at 43% to 56%. Democrats in Congress were at negative six with this voter group (44% to 50%), while Republicans in Congress clocked in at a brutal negative 20 points (37% to 57%). By contrast, White voters without a college degree viewed Harris in an extremely unfavorable light, with her sporting a nearly two-to-one disadvantage coming in at 35% favorable to 63% unfavorable. White non-college voters loved Trump, and he commanded a nearly plus 20-point favorability rating with this group at 59% to 40%. Democrats in Congress were close to Harris at 35% to 60%, while Republicans in Congress significantly lagged Trump at 53% to 42%.

Latinos liked Harris more than the general population did, and they gave her a 55% to 42% favorable rating compared to Trump’s 38% to 60% unfavorable rating. Congressional Democrats closely matched Harris with Latinos, at 53% to 40%, but Republicans in Congress were notably worse than Trump at 30% to 65%, which amounts to a double-digit share of Latinos liking Trump but not Congressional Republicans.

Persuadable voters ended up viewing Harris extremely unfavorably at 28% to 61%. They didn’t love Trump and were less fond of him than was the general population, but they gave him much better marks than Harris, as he clocked in at 42% to 51%. In our poll, this group claimed to ultimately choose Trump at the end by a 49% to 23% margin. However, in the five Presidential battleground states that also hosted Senate races, this group basically split, with 41% voting for the Senate Republican nominee to 40% for the Senate Democratic nominee.

Perhaps most tellingly, when asked which party was more extreme, 44% of respondents chose the Democratic party, 41% picked Republicans, and 12% said both. While the lead Democrats have on this measure is close to the margin of error, the fact that it is even close should send a shock through the veins of the entire anti-Trump coalition.

The Path Forward Voters Want from Democrats

To her credit, Kamala Harris attempted to run as a mainstream, moderate candidate in her 107-day sprint of a general election campaign. And it turns out that voters liked the positions she ran on this cycle. But they also harbored serious questions about the Democratic Party on many issues that weighed down Harris’s efforts to land her pivot effectively.

In our poll, we tested “green light” stances, which were center-left positions and messages advocated by Harris, as well as “red light” positions, which were far left ones that Trump paid communication highlighted, sometimes with archival footage of Kamala Harris from her time in 2019 running for President in a Democratic primary. Since each of these messages were only offered in a positive light with no pushback, all polled above 50%, but the range spanned 28 points from a low of 50% to a high of 78%, and results should be read with that context, meaning bare majority support is a middling result, at best. In every single instance, on all five issues we tested, the moderate message garnered significantly stronger support than that of the far left.

The most popular message overall was the crime “green light” message, which had 78% support for “holding violent criminals accountable, keeping guns out of criminals’ hands, and ensuring law enforcement has the resources and training they need to keep communities safe.” White voters with a college degree gave this 86% compared to 73% for non-college white voters, which is a substantial gap, but it is still incredibly high marks across the board for crime-conscious demographics.

The “green light’ climate message we tested talked about becoming “more energy independent by continuing to produce more oil than any country in history and exploring clean energy opportunities that will create more jobs and stimulate the economy.” This polled at 73% and was popular with white voters regardless of educational attainment. The “red light” climate message, which focused on “banning fracking” and the need for “transformative change” garnered 56% support overall even without any message pushback. A majority (50%) of non-college whites opposed the “red light” climate message, and even 41% of college-educated white voters felt it clanged. Latinos were skeptical of the “red light” climate message, and among persuadable voters, the climate “green light” messaging had 74% support compared to the “red light” at 50% support.

On border, which as a reminder was Trump’s strongest issue among Latinos, the “green light” message emphasizing the need to restore order at the border had a 71% support rating among Latinos. College-educated whites were also big fans of the “green light” border message, with 74% in support. Among persuadable voters, the “green light” immigration position dominated at 74%, with the “red light” message clocking in 23 points lower at 51%.

Again, most of these messages performed well in a positive vacuum, but the “red light” message around transgender issues was the exception. Only 36% of persuadable voters supported transgender rights when framed this way. However, there is evidence that strong positive communication on these issues works, as the “green light” message had 66% support. This version referenced parental rights, stating “they recognize the importance of parents having a say in what goes on in their kids’ lives. When it comes to transgender youth, they believe decisions should be left up to parents and families because we all deserve the freedom to make personal choices about our lives without the government telling us what to do.” When articulated thoughtfully, these messages appealed to voters across the ideological and demographic spectrum.

Importantly, the moderate-coded “green light” messages performed well with self-described Democrats as well, with each garnering 85% or more support. The “red light” messages didn’t do better even with this base group, and in fact they even garnered slightly lower support numbers with Democrats on some of the issues we tested.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the last-hundred-day push to the middle by VP Harris was not sufficient to counter the weight of the party brand, despite the policies and messages she touted being popular. Down-ballot Democrats who had longer runways to execute campaigns centered on moderation and popular mainstream policies fared better, because they created their own brand, and down-ballot Republicans could not match Trump’s strengths. While it is extremely unlikely that Trump will ever be on a ballot again, Democrats will still need a long-term plan to rebrand the party as one of sensible ideas that can be trusted to handle voters’ highest priority issues, particularly economic and safety concerns. If the party has any hope of defeating the MAGA forces now at the helm of government in the midterms and beyond, it needs to swiftly execute this shift to the center.

This memo was originally published for Third Way on November 22, 2024.