Why are working class whites so often defined as "whites without a degree?"

[Antonio the Sixth]

Because for some stupid reason American pundits have decided that education (instead of, you know, income or occupation) is the basis of class divisions. Which is ridiculous on so many levels.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Because saying that makes it sound like the republican base is poor people. Which is obviously rediculous but it fits the identity politics narrative of the right.

FTFY

[Antonio the Sixth]

Because saying that makes it sound like the republican base is poor people. Which is obviously rediculous but it fits the identity politics narrative of the left.

Pretty much this.  Politically active liberals (including much of the media) hardly represent a majority of Democrats, but they MUCH prefer - by and large - to picture their fight as against a bunch of Stone Age rubes than against self-sufficient people who just think the Democrats' ideas are stupid.

And I've never understood quite why this is, considering that the 'guy with briefcase hustling someplace' demographic is a massive paper tiger in terms of knowing what they're talking about and having good ideas.

Is this really the prevailing attitude among Democrats though? I know this sort of talk is common among ostensibly left-leaning Very Serious Beltway pundits, but does your average Democratic campaigner - or, say, your local liberal/progressive opinion leader - really think in those terms? Maybe this is wishful thinking on my part, but I tend to believe that those people (who ultimately matter more than the pundits) are a lot more likely to still see Democrats as the party of "working families" and "the common man/woman".

[Antonio the Sixth]

Because saying that makes it sound like the republican base is poor people. Which is obviously rediculous but it fits the identity politics narrative of the left.

Pretty much this.  Politically active liberals (including much of the media) hardly represent a majority of Democrats, but they MUCH prefer - by and large - to picture their fight as against a bunch of Stone Age rubes than against self-sufficient people who just think the Democrats' ideas are stupid.

And I've never understood quite why this is, considering that the 'guy with briefcase hustling someplace' demographic is a massive paper tiger in terms of knowing what they're talking about and having good ideas.

Is this really the prevailing attitude among Democrats though? I know this sort of talk is common among ostensibly left-leaning Very Serious Beltway pundits, but does your average Democratic campaigner - or, say, your local liberal/progressive opinion leader - really think in those terms? Maybe this is wishful thinking on my part, but I tend to believe that those people (who ultimately matter more than the pundits) are a lot more likely to still see Democrats as the party of "working families" and "the common man/woman".

I'm currently living in a heavily Democratic town with a median family income of ninety-three thousand dollars a year so it's very possible that my perceptions aren't representative. I sincerely hope that's the case. But I've heard a lot of similar attitudes in other areas, so it seems pretty well-advanced at least among coastal whites.

As far as coastal whites go, you're probably right. I've heard a few things of this general caliber in my circle of acquaintances (although the Department is fairly diverse and I thankfully haven't heard nonwhites join into this rhetoric). I guess this means that one of the challenges facing Democrats in the future will be to prevent this group from taking over the party and dictating the new line. My hope is that the old union-backed populist machines of the Midwest will hold their own, and that the Black and Hispanic components will be more prone to allying with them than with the yuppie faction.