Told  /  Comment

"It's the Economy, Stupid" is Never Just About the Economy

Can the Clinton campaign slogan chart a path forward for Democrats? Its history tells another story.

The creation of “it’s the economy, stupid” emerged from the work of pollster Stanley Greenberg. As my former colleague Tommy Craggs wrote, Greenberg is a “funny figure”—a former academic who studied apartheid South Africa and then, with the Clintons, sought to bring back the so-called “Reagan Democrats” from the GOP.

While running focus groups with these lapsed liberals, mostly white union workers in Michigan, Greenberg realized that “the economy” never just meant earning and spending money. It meant understanding the anger that other people—in this case, Black people—were getting too much from the government; it meant that Ronald Reagan, the movie star millionaire, was approachable as he demonized “welfare queens” but the patrician George Bush was an “out of touch” rich dude.

This, the campaign realized, gave Clinton a chance to end a streak of Republican wins. Reagan had seemed to nail down a dominant new era. By 1992, the Democratic Party seemed adrift. Only one liberal, Jimmy Carter—who was quickly ousted—had won the presidency since 1964.

Carville, the political consultant running Clinton’s campaign, was determined to end Reaganism. Losing ground during the 1992 campaign, he put three reminders on the wall of campaign headquarters to guide the message and appeal to a “vast middle class of Americans who decide every Presidential election.” The sign read: “Change vs. more of the same.” “The economy, stupid.” And, “Don’t forget healthcare.”

Only the middle phrase endured. Clinton’s more progressive demands of the campaign—attack the status quo and give people health care—were eclipsed by scandals, a pugnacious GOP Congress, and a turn to “triangulation” to win in 1996. Once in office, as labor historians Nelson Lichtenstein and Judith Stein argue, Clinton betrayed the progressivism he presented during the campaign. For all his talk of running on “the economy,” Clinton’s policies dealt a crushing blow to the working class. It was he who signed the North American Free Trade Agreement that contributed to more than 90,000 factories closing in 13 years. Perhaps more importantly, the shift to appeal to the moderate right made Democrats seem politically aligned against workers. Notably, in the Clinton era, the party made concerted efforts to shed its “big government” label, so it helped Republicans pass welfare reform that gutted protections for the poor.

This is why calls to return to Clinton’s messaging seem odd at the moment. We’re living in the wake of the backlash to his policies. But, also, we’re told to come home to his rhetoric. Where does that leave Democrats when it comes to actually doing something?