Democrats Holding Giant Meeting To Talk New Strategy: Copy Donald Trump’s Homework

Democrats quietly held a big meeting on Capitol Hill the first week of September to discuss political strategy; they came away from it essentially copying President Donald Trump’s homework.

As the Democratic Party holds internal discussions on effective messaging strategies for the upcoming midterm elections, a liberal think tank and group of operatives argued that a populist approach outperforms the newly proposed “Abundance” agenda, Politico reported Thursday. A memo shared with the outlet cautioned Democrats against depending solely on the idea, long championed by conservatives but only recently discovered by liberal writers Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, that excessive regulation stifles growth in key areas like housing and infrastructure. (Subscribe to MR. RIGHT, a free weekly newsletter about modern masculinity)

NEW: The “abundance” agenda is being challenged by Geoff Garin, @brianefallon, @ChrisForPA & @Groundwork, who argue econ populism is more electorally effective. They’re presenting polling to Hill staffers & Dem operatives this week, @ec_schneider scoops:https://t.co/dWQYJ2MpK3

— Sally Goldenberg (@SallyGold) September 4, 2025

In collaboration with the liberal think tank Groundwork Action, the research was reportedly conducted by Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster, and strategist Brian Fallon, both of whom were involved in Kamala Harris’s campaign.

“While there are elements of the Abundance agenda that have appeal, and the choice on which messages to deliver is not zero-sum, a populist economic approach better solves for Democrats’ challenges with working-class voters,” the memo states, according to Politico. “If candidates are asking which focus deserves topmost billing in Democrats’ campaign messaging, the answer is clear: though some voters believe excessive bureaucracy can be a problem, it ranks far behind other concerns and tackling it does not strike voters as a direct response to the problem of affordability.”

The memo argues that although a populist economics and “Abundance” ideas are not totally incompatible, Democrats should still lead with anti-corporate messaging, such as blaming price gouging for higher costs, not bloated bureaucracies and excessive red tape. According to a poll conducted by the group, around 66% of voters said the government’s tendency to cater to billionaires and large corporations was a more significant issue than bureaucratic inefficiencies, a concern for 37% of respondents. More voters also expressed a preference for measures targeting price gouging rather than reducing bureaucratic obstacles and regulations.

Democratic Pennsylvania Rep. Chris Deluzio joined Garin and Fallon in briefing Capitol Hill staffers and Democratic operatives about polling and focus group insights that support their argument. The group plans to present these findings to congressional Democrats in week or so, according to Politico.

Some of the “Abundance” ideas from Klein and Thompson— again, some of which have long been supported by conservatives and libertarians — are actually good, and would help address the affordability crisis. Namely, slashing environmental red tape in order to build more homes. They also want a ton of green energy, better transportation, more money invested in scientific research and development, vertical farming, drone delivery and automated technology, lab-grown meat, and supersonic airplanes.

Does some of that sound good? Yes. Does some of it sound bad (and far too utopian)? Most certainly.

Unfortunately for Democrats, they do not have any populist messenger as effective as Trump, who can sell a policy like cutting red tape to make things more affordable. He did it during his campaign in 2024, and although the cities themselves haven’t panned out so far, he even coined the term “Freedom Cities,” an idea that sounds quite a lot like the vision of “Abundance” liberals.

Democrats may copy Trump’s homework, but for them to pass the test in the coming Novembers, they will need their own version of Trump. They will need a figure who has the charisma and populist appeal, who can win over working-class voters, and in the same breath, make the case for policies that may not sound interesting in sound bites but are nonetheless extremely important.