SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

* indicates required
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
The Progressive

NewsWire

A project of Common Dreams

For Immediate Release
Contact: Email:,press@demandprogress.org

Americans want Populism, Not So-Called “Abundance”

While the abundance debate thrives on podcasts and social media, the voters want candidates who address corporate power and working class concerns

Demand Progress commissioned a national poll of 1,200 registered voters to test the resonance of the “abundance agenda” being promoted as a potential policy and political refocus for the Democratic party. The objective of the poll was to compare support for abundance arguments to a prominent competing framework: populist arguments and policy objectives.

The results of the poll clearly showed that, while there was some support for elements of the abundance arguments, a focus on populist economic concerns – corporate and monopoly power, money in politics, and corruption – consistently resonated significantly more broadly and deeply, while fomenting less opposition, than abundance arguments. This was particularly true of Democratic voters — and, crucially, was also true of self-identified moderate and independent voters.

“To get out of the political wilderness, and win over not just Democrats but also independent and moderate voters, policymakers need to loudly state their case for helping middle- and working-class Americans. What these voters want is clear: a populist agenda that takes on corporate power and corruption,” said Emily Peterson-Cassin, corporate power director at Demand Progress. “The stakes are too high for Democrats to fixate on a message that only appeals to a minority of independent and Democratic voters.”

In one tranche of questions respondents were presented with one argument labeled the “abundance” argument and one labeled the “populist” argument. Respondents could choose to indicate a favorable or unfavorable response to either, both, or neither of the arguments.

The poll showed that 55.6% of voters said they would be more (26.3% much more) likely to vote for a candidate for Congress or President who made the populist argument. Meanwhile 43.5% said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate (12.6% much more) who made the “abundance” argument.

Republicans were much more likely to react positively to a candidate making the abundance argument (58.8% more likely to vote for candidate), while Democrats and independents were less moved to support such an argument (32.6% and 40.6% respectively). Democrats and independents reacted more positively to a candidate making the populist argument (72.5% of 55.4% respectively) compared to 39.6% of Republicans.

The poll went on to ask respondents to choose whether they agreed more with the populist argument or the abundance argument and found that a plurality of 42.8% said they agreed more with the populist argument while 29.2% chose the abundance argument. Once again, Democrats and independents particularly favored the populist argument (59.0% to 16.8% among Democrats and 44.3% to 28.4% among independents) while Republicans favored the abundance argument (43.7% to 25.0%).

Even more striking were the results to a separate tranche of questions wherein the poll asked how different ways of a candidate addressing how best to “make the government and economy do a better job serving working and middle-class Americans” would affect voting choices. (Unlike in the above set of questions, these arguments were not actively described to respondents as “populism” or “abundance.”)

A significant majority (81.6%) of respondents responded positively to a populism-aligned argument, “get money out of politics, break up corporate monopolies, and fight corruption,” while only 8.4% said it would make them less likely to vote for such a candidate. Among independents those numbers were even stronger with 84.8% responding positively and 8.5% reacting negatively. Even self-described moderates and conservatives had strong net positive responses to the populist-aligned argument (81.5%-8.3% for moderates and 74.3%-13.6% for conservatives).

When presented with a candidate offering an abundance-aligned argument, “reduce regulations that hold back the government and private sector from taking action,” only 47.3% of respondents said that would make them more likely to vote for such a candidate while 33.8% said they would be less likely. Even among Republicans, the abundance-aligned argument performs somewhat less favorably than the populist-aligned argument — while Democrats and independents respond much less favorably to the abundance argument than to the populist-aligned argument.

A synthesis of the two arguments had a level of support that fell between those of “populism” and “abundance” — with 72.2% reacting positively and 13.5% reacting negatively to a synthesis.

Longtime pollster Dan Cohen, an advisor on the project noted, “the voters are demonstrating that they understand the problem with quite a traditional view of American politics and economics: that there is too much power and influence in corporate hands and everyday Americans aren’t getting their fair share. Democrats would be wise to listen to the voters and respond directly to those views with their rhetoric and actions.”

The poll of 1,200 registered voters across the US, was conducted on the YouGov platform over the dates of May 8 and May 13, 2025. It has a margin of error of +/- 3.09%.

Demand Progress amplifies the voice of the people -- and wields it to make government accountable and contest concentrated corporate power. Our mission is to protect the democratic character of the internet -- and wield it to contest concentrated corporate power and hold government accountable.