On February 18th, national Democratic Party Chair Ken Martin triumphantly declared that "the Democratic Party always has been and always will be the party of the worker."
Martin said that a month after saying the exact opposite, triumphantly declaring that "There are a lot of good billionaires out there…and we will take their money."
This is the silly predicament the Democratic Party finds itself in in 2025: how does our party adopt a working-class aesthetic without angering our billionaire donors?
It's not just a silly predicament, it's impossible. Billionaires and the working class have opposite interests. Billionaires may sometimes agree with workers on social issues. But billionaires broadly oppose the minimum wage, unions, and providing better workplace benefits—all goals of the working class.
Statements like Martin's contribute to a perception of Democrats as being phony. Democrats do not appear serious arguing against "billionaire influence in our democracy" when they accept money from billionaires like Bill Gates and Reid Hoffman.
Such hypocrisy also weakens the criticism of Elon Musk and Donald Trump. One popular Democratic attack on Musk is that he's an "unelected billionaire". That's true, but what's stopping a voter from pointing to Mr. Martin's statements and saying "Okay, but how are you any different?"
The truth is that billionaires have too much influence in our democracy, and "billionaire influence" is a problem in both parties. That's not to say the parties are equal; the Democratic Party is unequivocally better than the Republicans on minority rights, labor rights, and, well, supporting constitutional democracy.
It is to say, however, that if Democrats are serious about being the "party of the worker"—as well as winning elections—they should differentiate themselves from the Republicans by rejecting billionaire money.
