Democrats need a winning one word or two that describes what they are about:. How about " being fair" Update/ 7//10/2026

This November, Democrats will be mostly about: we are not Trump/MAGA. There will be those who are not this kind of GOP but would like to register their disgust with it.  When they cast a ballot, they have a choice, and if they cannot swallow Democrats either, they can either skip the line, stay home, or hold their noses. That may work in November 2026, but in 2028? How about getting a jump-start on both 2026 and 2028 and coming up with a theme that is both an implied attack on MAGA/Trump and also contains a positive message? And do it in one or two words: How about "being fair"?

(Update 7/10/2026: Here is an example of being clear on issues that was devised by my local Democratic Party...in Grand County, Colorado.  It may not have a one-word umbrella, but it is at least a step in the right direction and a political plank that local candidates can run on. https://grandcountydems.org/?utm_source=Grand%20Dems%20email%20list&utm_campaign=a20073d1d2-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2026_04_30_06_49_COPY_02&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-0560435747-522472729    )

That is still not enough because the credibility of such a theme depends on what and how Democrats plan to do about it. For 2026, since all politics are local, each Senate or Congressional race may be tailored to local needs and gripes. However, in 2028, Democrats had better have their act together on public policy issues, which seem fair to more than just those who register with their party.  Exactly, for example, are you going to get lower prices, less corruption, and less chaos fairly? 

I proposed using "fairness" as a theme almost a year ago. Since then, there has been a lot of political water under the bridge that makes it even more relevant today.  It is even more true today as both an attack on MAGA and a vision of a positive value around which public policy and a party platform can be shaped.  It is about bringing fairness back to America.

Public policy words like cost, chaos, and corruption fit neatly into both an attack and a vision of the future.   It is especially true as the self-dealing pocket-stuffing Trump and family ask to be exempted from IRS scrutiny and laws in their outrageous slush fund proposal to reward criminal activity committee on their behalf, from J6ers to Tina Peters, a county clerk. The stigmatizing of concentration camps of those who MAGA see as undesirables in our country, whether they had followed the law or skirted it while otherwise leading exemplary lives, is n not fair, and it is related to an administration peppered with white Christian nationalists who see themselves as superior to others.   When one group strives to repress another group, racial, religious, or cultural, that is not fair, but the chaos it creates results in conflicts on steroids and a feeling that everything is short-term, depending on the news cycle and Trump's midnight tweets. When golden ballrooms and triumphal arches dominate Trump's view of prosperity for himself, while so many he governs see the affordability of everyday living decline, as evidenced by the price tags, it is not fair.  When the ultra-rich and the corrupt determine public policy, it creates an unfair advantage, and those who are neither corrupt nor ultra-rich are not treated fairly because their voices are dismissed by a corrupt ruler.  When one party tries to suppress the turnout of the other, that is not fair. Thankfully, the SAVE Act went down in flames, as had the attempts to unseat African American congresspeople in South Carolina and in Alabama on 5/26/26 through racial gerrymandering. https://www.vote.o   rg/save-act/

Democrats could use the value of fairness to specific proposals: Following the rule of law instead of the rule of one who thinks executive orders are issues, the laws that are not enforced are a beginning.  The rule of law enforced without fear or favor is one way to achieve fairness.  That includes restoring the independence of the DoJ and the checks and balances of Congress.  The Voting Rights Act they support is another means of restoring fairness.  A tax policy in which everyone pays their fair share is, well, "fair". Those are just the beginnings of a fairness platform that looks not to the past but to a way forward. An immigration policy that provides due process and protections of constitutional rights and secure borders at the same time is also fair..  There is another way "fair" could be worked in: anti-corruption and anti-gerrymandering could be "fairplay";  

Here is what I wrote in this blog a year ago.

June, 2025: Once upon a time, I thought Americans valued fairness.  It was a value people embraced.  I will make the leap of assuming that it is still a value held by more voters than by those who are completely self-absorbed and self-promoting. What about a good gut cry:  "It ain't fair" and proposing a " fair deal for all".  The implication that "all" means rich who need to chip in their fair share and ordinary people, who are just hard-working people, trying to make ends meet, caring for others or themselves and their families, who are very disadvantaged, sick, aged, uneducated, or victims of racial or cultural discrimination. 

Packaging is always a challenge, but I recently heard about a way to do it. Whatever you think of former Rep. David Jolly, who morphed from a Florida Republican Congressman to an independent and finally to a Democrat to run for Florida governor, or even if you think he has no chance to win, he has a way with words 6/6/ and 6/7, 2025. He had two short phrases in a recent CBS interview that hit home to me, and he repeated them on other media: He is for Democratic values that "fight for an economy for all and a party that lifts up everyone," providing a context for the economic fairness and cultural issues he then fleshed out in short soundbites of issues relevant to Florida. 

Perhaps I am a cockeyed optimist, but Democrats I think understand that the goal of the anti DEI application of the radical MAGAs is to roll back the civil rights movement and it is not fair to all, tax policies that give great deals to the very rich at the expense of the very poor are not fair to all, or propose tariff policies that screw the budget conscious families to satisfy some notion of a power grabbing president, are also just not fair.

 Democrats' messaging to date has not been put into clear, sharp words.  Democrats have backed into it by decrying each issue as it comes up as bad for ordinary people. It has become a predictable background noise. Democrats should reverse the order and state the value up front, rather than delivering it as a conclusion before getting into the brain-numbing weeds of public policy issues and data, as cable talkers, those at political rallies, town halls, and sound-bite interviewees often do.

 Democrats have a history of the New Deal, the war on poverty, and promoting consumer and environmental protections that attempt to bring fairness in public policies to more than just the rich.  Why not resurrect the slogan from a true populist president, Harry S. Truman: "a fair deal". It's roots go deep in Democratic party traditions and Truman's version was as timely then as it is today, if more so."President Truman's Fair Deal ensured the survival of social security, preserved the American welfare system, and prioritized civil rights legislation." Truman's Fair Deal | Overview, History & Significance - Lesson | Study.com    It just needs to be packaged a bit differently, as a value applied to our modern times. It is both an implied attack on MAGA and a positive message about what Democrats stand for today, with appeal across party lines.

The truth is, the MAGA core group will never be moved off whatever appeals to them, including dog-whistles and attempts by Trump to execute unconstitutional policies that favor one race or economic power over another. There are voters out there who still value being fair or who count themselves as victims of the MAGA unfairness policies. Democrats do still have to make sure those being hurt know who to blame, but that is a subpoint, not the theme alone.  It needs to be put in the context of fairness.

 

Answering questions that never were asked in the past: what'wrong with high costs, chaos, corruption, cruelty, and no compassion

 

What is wrong with the high cost of living, chaos, corruption, and cruelty? This is the kind of question I never had to ask in my lifetime, or for that matter, found so many who do not care enough about the answers, and out of fear or loyalty remain silent.. The challenge for the political opposition is to remind them of why those things are bad and how they hurt even the ones Trump says he loves. 

Let me add one more C to the alliterated attack list: Constitutional crisis:   The fruits of his power grab are high living costs, chaos, corruption, and cruelty. Trump has distorted, exceeded,  worked around, and abused the use of the powers granted him in the Constitution whenever he can. The rule of law is mocked to its demise. Trump's modus when constrained by a law he does not like is to ignore it, break it, test it, and hope that, in six months, a friendly judge does not tell him no.

Incompetence and no compassion are other descriptive words we rarely applied to past presidents, but the Iran Hormuz screw-up is due to Trump's incompetence to anticipate fallout and his lack of compassion about affordability concerns (even mocking the word), and warehousing migrants in gulags without access to legal help is another.

 So what is wrong with the high cost of living? It is not fair to those struggling to balance their personal budgets now, while he and his cronies are living their gilded lives.

So what is wrong with the chaos?  Planning for survival on one day, whether you are in business or struggling with your budget, or worried about personal or national safety, may be obsolete the next. Trust in the leader's judgment or motivation, or trust in his good word, is gone. 

 So what's wrong with corruption?  Problem with getting rich on foreign investments: he who pays the fiddler calls the tune, if not now, sooner or later. The Emoluments Clause in the Constitution is constantly broken by Trump, who is enriching himself and his family on real estate and crypto schemes with investments from foreign governments. Aside from the moral and legal questions, the problem with corruption is that what motivates the great leader's decisions may benefit him and his family's wealth and power, but may harm those he governs who are not among the beneficiaries of his public policies.  

So what is wrong with cruelty, and is the use and threat of it quite OK? The fear of its use keeps the disloyal in line and deters others from doing what is not in their own interests. Using the DOJ to launch investigations on political enemies is a cruel misuse of power and true treatment of migrants in hopes all of one race will self-deport, whether or not they otherwise had any civil rights.

So what about a Constitutional crisis? Trump has been able to strike fear and demand loyalty to him by ignoring the rule of law and the Constitutional constraints because of a cowed Congress, a staff and cabinet of yes men, and his core MAGA base. The only constraints so far are a slow-acting judiciary and some justices who comply with his anti-democracy instincts. He thinks he can ignore the poll because 1) he has gotten away with acting like a dictator and thinking he is one, 2) the ability to use force, ICE, and seizure of voting rolls and election machinery to avoid an election loss at the November midterms and beyond.   For that reason, a a 60% disapproval of his policies is of no concern.  In any case, to him, this democracy is of, by , and for Trump and those who keep him in power. If you commit a crime on his behalf, he'll just pardon you.

 https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2026/04/messaging-again-democrats-may-be-onto.html

Is chaos the best word for Democrats to use? Messaging again.

 In 2024, Nikki Haley, the only significant primary opponent to Trump, coined the word "chaos" to criticise the kind of government Trump would bring to America if he got elected.  The term "chaos" did not work well enough for her then.  Will it be the best approach for the anti-MAGA today?  Today, I heard Chuck Schumer, Senate minority leader, use the word  "chaos" as the attack charge congressional Democrats are planning as a theme for next week.  "Chaos" may need to be replaced with "cruel" if Trump policies become a long-term, painful reality with higher prices, inflation, and recession, as Democrats have predicted. That could come sooner than later. In fact, it is happening now: https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-trump-tariffs-trade-war-04-11-25/card/consumer-sentiment-tanks-in-april-on-recession-fears-zPCqlvnxjQZIIJWhMVEy?mod=e2tw   and https://data.sca.isr.umich.edu/charts.php

What Trump just did in proclaiming a 90-day moratorium on tariff disposition is to keep "chaos" on the burner, he thinks. It was clearly a delay tactic. However,  businesses may still hike prices as a hedge against what they feel about the future. We will get a better feel for that within the month, as March and April, the consumer price index and inflation data are released, "Chaos" itself can still have a degree of impact depending upon how much the person in power is trusted, and Trump's erratic behavior does not help the trust factor. It isn't just consumer prices that will tell the tale. The impact of the DOGE chainsaws on federal customer services and funding for human services will begin to be felt by even those who have not been paying attention.

More:

The most important question pollsters can ask is, "Does X care about you?" Choosing the right word theme can make the difference between losers and winners

  "Chaos" is a two-edged sword.  For those who believe Trump's soothing words that it will hurt a little now, but it will be beautiful in the future, and the non-MAGAs who believe it will turn out badly, warning that pain will last, is predictive and unsettling. However, as a political stance now, it does not swing many blue voters who once voted for Trump.   Chaos may be a good description of what is happening now, as Trump reacts to Wall Street crashing and claiming his tariff policies are a negotiating strategy he had always planned.    "Chaos" may need to be replaced soon with "cruel"  if Trump policies becoming a forever painful reality with higher prices and inflation as Democrats have predicted.

 Chaos is a term  that may cause worries to MAGA, but if leaning red, they are keeping the faith it will all turn out fine, and the leaning blue is rallying their voters with Chicken Little, the sky is falling in, warnings.  The term chaos may work for some, but when the sky actually crashes on their heads, it becomes reality even for the MAGA.  We are not there yet in spite of the extreme Wall Street gyrations.  When the tariffs actually impact the costs of what people want or need to buy or spend money on, Chicken Little comes home to roost.  Chaos is no longer the theme Democrats should embrace, but another word needs to become the theme.. depending on the severity. MAGA becomes the party of needless pain to benefit the rich. "Cruel." is a better pejorative, and the reminder of how Trump's promises failed them, should be, MAGA, "you voted for this?"

.By far, the better stance is the sub-theme that whatever MAGA is doing, they do not care about those who never seem to have enough to make ends meet. They are the party of "let them eat cake", disconnected for the real life people are actually experiencing.  Trump cares mostly for those who have some money to pay for what they need or want, regardless of cost (like oligarchs and billionaires ).What politicians call such people is problematic. Depending on the candidate, those are called working class, middle class, or something similar, which is a handy term that some may not describe where they are...poor and old or facing large expenses on cars, home ownership, or expensive medical challenges, or unemployment.  Working class is economic, socialist jargon to which not all can relate.  American optimism is that, unlike in Europe, it is possible to live the American dream even if you come from economic deprivation. You are not stuck in a "class," but there is hope for upward mobility.

" Kitchen table" worries can resonate, but... better still ...worried about making ends meet is a better description of a wide range of economic "classes". Some may just be worried about even affording the bare necessities of a place to live and food to eat, and more will worry about whether they can afford college tuition, take a vacation, or buy or replace electronics, appliances, and a new or used car.  Some may be even well off but are penny pinchers by nature. Some who experience layoffs may find themselves sinking into a lower "class". I remember as a radio talk show host on consumer affairs, I received blowback from listeners who resented being placed in an economic class for political purposes. Many people do not see themselves fitting into any class.  It works for Bernie and AOC, but the people impacted by MAGA/Trump/Musk are more than just the lower middle income and poor, but also stretch into the middle income.  We are all consumers, but not everyone in that group is price sensitive or is on a budget. It does however relate to more than just those struggling to pay for basic necessities, but also those who are resenting being screwed by price hikes and inflation who are better heeled.

Do women have the balls to be president? Trump, Vance "mysogynistic pigs"?

 Our family, fortunately, has the ability to interface with people of many views.  Here is what he got from an associate, absolutely the craziest train of thought and a dangerous one from a dedicated Trump supporter.  A recent conversation hit two Trump/MAGA hot buttons: misogyny and why Dictator Trump should be elected to avoid nuclear war. The misogyny thing got an angry snort from me and reminded me of the time when I was told I had balls. https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2024/09/newest-magalland-craziness-way-to.html

Vance's attack on women who are childless cat women and Huckabee Sanders as women who do not have their own children as not humble enough are echoes of a bygone era where women knew their place, and it was not out in politics. They were slurs meant to appeal to Trump's male heavy support. https://19thnews.org/2024/09/poll-women-driving-harris-lead-over-trump/  

It also got Liz Cheney's dander up, too. Talking about balls, she has 'em. She called Trump and Vance "misogynist pigs".Liz Cheney Rips Into ‘Misogynistic Pigs’ Trump and Vance to Hoots and Hollers (msn.com)

Let us talk about this misogynist twist. One of the strangest results of my attempt to run for mayor was to oust a powerful political boss of a major city so Denver could have a modern future in which people wanted to live, which left me with mixed feelings. I almost did it, coming in second in a nonpartisan field of 13. The big guy still won, but his age and incompetence got him, and Federico Pena won the next election, got us to imagine a great city, and created one, too, in two terms as mayor of Denver, later serving in two presidential cabinet posts.   After my election, the word came around that "boy, did I have balls". Yes, I was fearless, and yes, I had verbal skills. I guess that was the highest compliment I could have gotten in the early 1970s as the first woman to attempt to run for that position (and in modern times, the first to run for any city-wide office).   

So hats off to Harris, who had the balls to take on drug cartels and a four four-year apprenticeship to get to know every foreign leader and threat in this world,  She has the balls and the experience, unlike the amateur elected in 2016 TV star with no comparable government or national security experience and a reputation of a great businessman (that we know now was based on fraud, deceit, and multiple bankruptcies. ) His only management skill was modeled after mob bosses, based up ginning fear , lies, threats, and taking retribution against the opposition, perfectly suited for becoming a dictator (which is a mob boss in national political power).

Do you have no balls, women? I'll pit Indira Gandhi, Angela Merkel, Margaret Thatcher, Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria, Catherine the Great, and Golda Meir against any man, regardless of politics and lifestyle. Some were monarchs, and some did it within democracies. My family member, male, almost 60, white, hopes that Harris comes across more like Iron Lady, still ladylike, Thatcher, and paints Trump as a belly-up appeasing coward who can't understand why anyone would die defending our country.

It also got Lia Cheney's dander up, too.  She called Trump and Vance "misogynist pigs".Liz Cheney Rips Into ‘Misogynistic Pigs’ Trump and Vance to Hoots and Hollers (msn.com)

OK, now for the dictator crap:

Destroying democracy as Trump can do on day one by signing all the already prepared documents submitted by his supporters at the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025,. All can be done with his newly granted immune powers to set a dictatorship in motion.  It would not be like a frog in gradually boiling water. The Heritage Foundation plans to do this in the first 180 days. Turning back civil and women's rights and health care to the 1950s just "might" be resisted, and the internal chaos that would cause would simply make us more vulnerable to those taking aggressive action. Destroying mutual defense treaties would mean we would be on our own, and Western Europe would go its own way regarding Russian aggression, while Trump would just let Putin have Ukraine. So that is just for starters. He's an appeaser and a belly-upper.   

 Ultimate hawk Dick Cheney, former VP, just announced he was voting for Harris in no uncertain terms.Trump responded "he's irrelevant". He can only hope. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ten-former-top-us-military-officials-back-harris-call-trump-a-danger-2024-09-09

 Business cannot be conducted in that atmosphere, and high tariffs, according to every Nobel prize economist in the world, and businessmen know themselves only lead to high inflation, probably recession, and moving manufacturing out of the US to avoid retaliatory action.  That is why Wall Street, led by Goldman Sachs and others, is beginning to wake up and panic at the thought of Trump implementing his plans.  Good luck to our economy and national security in the next four years of Trump's presidency.   

We also tried America First out once in the1930s; we watched English PM Chamberlain declare peace in our times as he handed the Czechs over to Hitler, and Japan saw us without the political will or ability to defend themselves. Appeasement ended in Dec.7 1941. It was an epic miscalculation that took four years of epic death and destruction to resolve, and that was until we dropped our nuclear bombs on Japan. Now, every big power aggressor has the ability to do the same to us.