When a member of the Democratic Party is in the White House, it’s common to hear frustrated Republican voters complaining about the rising cost of living. We’ve heard it all before: Gas prices are too high, rent is ridiculous, and the cost of groceries is getting out of hand. Surely, we’ve even said it all ourselves. The key difference it that the voters in question—who by no means constitute all Republicans—tend to place the blame squarely on the shoulders of the Democratic president. For them, Presidents Biden and Obama were both singularly responsible for the price of unleaded.
Of course, fluctuations in the cost of living are a much more complicated subject than they make it out to be. Their own logic—or the gaps within it—even betrays at least some understanding of this. Two examples come to mind. First, they are perfectly comfortable criticizing Democratic leaders when costs rise but wouldn’t dare praise them when they fall. Second, their chosen commander-in-chief is directly responsible for surging grocery and gas prices as a result of his recently implemented tariffs, and they’ve largely excused his economic imprudence. Huh. So you mean to tell me it’s not the Democrats?
Unbeknownst to them, the gas price truthers of the country may have revealed an effective strategy for penetrating their ideological armor of politics and finally getting through to them. So long as they only speak the languages of political talking points and Trumpist propaganda, there’s no ground to be gained by engaging them in political discussion. They’re entrenched in ideology, not policy, and not even morality. So how is someone concerned by the ongoing presidential power grab meant to disturb the head honcho’s voter base? Maybe, just maybe, the solution lies in their greatest pet peeve—the cost of gas.
By personalizing what is deliberately politicized by people in positions of power, there’s an opportunity to lift the mythological veil woven by President Trump and his far-right allies. While behind this veil, his low-income supporters (of which there are a great many) utterly fail to recognize the crushing, masochistic irony of their unwavering support for unsympathetic billionaires. Perhaps they’d wake up and smell the ashes if instead of barking policy or, God forbid, even more ideology at them, we centered the discussion on their basic needs. For example, asking “Does the richest man alive have your best interests at heart? Would he care what it costs to fill your tank?”
The vicelike grasp of ideology has always been, and is likely to always be, the greatest weapon of authoritarian governments. Once propaganda and indoctrination have taken hold, even the most vulnerable of people are blind to the damage being done to them and their country. Perhaps the old methods—arguing for alternative ideological positions, political stances, etc.—have run their course and are no longer effective. Perhaps this is too “big picture.” Shrinking the issue to the most personal level possible may be the way to reach the average struggling American.
Featured image/photo courtesy of Krish Parmar on Unsplash.