IHIP News - Trump Drowning in the Polls As All Hell Breaks Loose, Expert on Voters Weighs In

Episode Date: April 12, 2026

Author and scholar Jonathan Metzl joins us to explain why trump is losing popularity at record speed.Order our new book, join our Substack, shop our merch, and more by clicking here: https://linktr.ee/ivehaditpodcast.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

All right, I think it's finally might be happening. A poll is showing that Trump is underwater with white working class voters. Pop this up. Trump reaches negative net approval with working class white voters for the first time ever. And when you dive into the poll, it says 66% of white working class voters went for Trump over Harris in 2024. And now only 49% approved. that is a drop of 17% for one of Trump's core basis. And here to discuss this with me, why do working class voters vote for a man who services exclusively millionaires and billionaires?

Is Dr. Jonathan Metzell. He is the director of the Department of Medicine, Health and Society and Professor of Sociology and Psychiatry at Vanderbilt University, just an all-time underachiever we have here. an author of seven books, including the protest psychosis, dying of whiteness, and most recently what we've become living and dying in a country of arms. Jonathan, welcome. Thanks so much. It's great to be here. I'm so happy to have you. So this whole phenomenon, like when I first started voting, the Democratic Party was the party of working class. And in my time of voting, I'm 51 years old now, there has been a really big shift. And now,

the working class voters vote for the Republican Party and exclusively for Donald Trump. I mean, he's like their icon. What do you make of that? I've been researching this phenomenon for about 15 years now. I'm speaking to you from Tennessee this morning. I've done a lot of work in rural Tennessee and rural Kentucky, in Missouri where I'm from, and Kansas, where I partially grew up. And talking to people who seemingly voted against their own interests. I've interviewed people who vote against the Affordable Care Act because, you know, it would give them free government health care. I've voted, I've interviewed people who voted for politicians who are defunding the schools that their

own kids go to. My research doesn't really find that people are crazed or irrational. I think that no surprise to probably many of your listeners, people are voting out of fear. Politicians are telling them, if you don't vote for me, no one will protect you, that other people are out to take what's yours, conditions of austerity. People feel like there are limited resources, and they're in a tribal fight against other groups for resources. And so I've kind of seen the whole spectrum of this. And it's been fascinating of my research,

because the extent to which people will go to vote for those politicians, I mean, in dying of whiteness, I interview people who were literally dying of medical conditions that would have been covered by the Affordable Care Act, had their politicians supported the Affordable Care Act, but they, they, they were not willing to go there. So partially, this is about voting and partially it's about identity.

And I can just say it's very deep. So the title Dying of Whiteness, is there a component that people are fine taking policies that don't deliver materially for them if they also don't deliver for minorities? Is that why you have whiteness in the title? I mean, partially. So obviously, I'm a white American. I'm a white Southerner. I was doing folks. And so I'm not trying to say like my own people are crazy or rational. I mean, they are at times for certain voting patterns and things like that.

But I would say that there was a kind of emphasis on a kind of tribal identity politics, a kind of sense that there's only so many resources. And if you don't get them, other people are going to take them. And so I've been seeing this. I mean, obviously we have a long history in the south of the Civil War and other horrible moments of our history. But more recently, I'll never forget, I was doing research around the Affordable Care Act and I was doing a focus group. And I was interviewing one man and I said, you know, he was quite medically ill. And I said, you know, if the Affordable Care Act goes through

in Tennessee and your politicians support it, you'll get dialysis, which you need to stay alive. And he said, you know, I realize that's probably the case, but I'm not going to vote for, and the quote he used is, I'm not going to vote for any system in which my tax. dollars are going to support Mexicans and welfare queens. That was the quote he used. And so the idea was basically there's only so much resource and either I'm going to get it or undeserving others are going to get it. And I've just seen how that narrative was manipulated to make people feel like they were in competition with each other when in fact as a doctor and as a health policy expert, I can tell you we're much better off if we collaborate. I mean healthcare systems as one

example from my work work much better if everybody's kind of rowing in the same direction. And so in a way, trying to get people to feel like they weren't in common cause with other people is partially why our politics are so tribal. And so is there a propaganda component to this? Because I see the through line. Your book was written before COVID. But there were so many people who were terrified of getting vaccinated. And then they ended up in the ER. And they're on these machines. I forget what they were called that turned them all around. And they were screaming. I want, can I get vaccinated now? Can I get vaccinated now? And there was just an incredible amount of propaganda done during this pandemic. And I'm not saying we did everything right, but I'm saying

that the efforts that I saw weren't as much control as they were life saving. We were trying to save people's lives. The ACA is trying to save people's lives. But this notion that a lot of people on the right have that they would cut their nose off despite their faces just to make sure black people or immigrants don't get it or that the federal government is controlling them, how much does propaganda, the Fox News, the right-wing media ecosystem, how much does that play into radicalizing these people? Because I grew up in Oklahoma City and I, this is just my own theory. And now I live in New York. When you live in the suburbs of a city like Oklahoma City, it's very white, there's not a lot of culture. And so your church and patriotism become your whole identity

because there's no focus on arts and other things that might be thought-provoking. And what is your take on all of that in the through line with COVID and this affordable care act person that you interviewed? Well, I think there's a very powerful narrative that there's only a certain amount of resource and other people are wanting what you have or if you don't get it, somebody else is going to take it to your detriment. I think that there's a very powerful narrative that says, I'm the only person that's going to protect you or I'm the only other party that's going to protect you. So our politics very broadly. I mean, when I wrote dying of whiteness, it was before the first Trump presidency. It was happening across the South.

And I was seeing people act in ways that I found irrational or against what I thought were their own interests at the time. But the narrative of, I'm on your side against those other people is a very powerful message, and particularly when resources start to get taken away. And so I think for me, part of the power of that narrative was people were in an austerity climate. I mean, there wasn't enough money for the health care system. And people were being told, even before the first Trump presidency here in Tennessee, it's because of these immigrants who are pouring across the borders,

and you need to look down and block the immigrants. But really the reason there wasn't resource in the system was because of the massive tax cuts that were going. So all the money, all the resource that would have paid for roads and the health care system and schools that would have benefited most people was not, I just wanted to shout when I was doing the focus groups. You know, you're being taught to look down, but really look up because the issue is the money in the system

is going toward a very select few. And so in that regard, it did. foreshadow I think a lot of the tensions that were happening. But I think the other important part of my research in dying of whiteness, but also in the gun book that I just finished, is also that people are being told that these kind of tribal identities are a source of power, that if we just stick together and we reject the government, that the Democrats aren't going to take control and then they won't be able to do all these things for you. And so it's not just straight up racism. Maybe I thought that at one time, but it's more that our politics really have created a system in which there's a price to pay for breaking with your tribe.

And so I'll just, I'll never forget, like 2013, 2014. I'd ask people, why are you rejecting your own health care? And they said, well, if I do it, the Democrats are going to get more popular. And then our politicians aren't going to take control. And we won't be able to overtake the Supreme Court and, you know, do away with Roe and all these things. And so people were kind of aware that this was a price that they were paying in a way, and really what I see is our broken system, which rewards tribalization and disincentivizes cooperation. So it's owning the libs. Like that's kind of the ethos is owning the libs.

We have this media ecosystem where, you know, the current president always talks about the enemy from within. And knowing that you were getting these answers in 2013, 24, 14 before he descended on the escalator and then he starts with the enemy from within. It sounds like this electorate was ripe for that type of messaging, this owning the lib style messaging. I want to switch gears quickly on your new book about guns. And I haven't read it yet. But I've been thinking a lot about how we're morally collapsing so much right now.

And I'm thinking about what just didn't happen when Trump got elected the second time. I mean, there's been a lot of horrible things that. we just allow and then, you know, push back to the corners of our brain. And I can't tell you how many times now I get an alert on my phone, mass shooting. And I'm so desensitized to it. And we never really write that wrong. And in my state, my home state of Oklahoma, there are 7-Elevens that have vending machines where you can buy ammo.

Like, seems like guns, and at least in my state, they certainly have more rights than women do. So how do you live? this violent gun culture that we have where you see these mass shootings, like I think about Sandy Hook all the time, those kindergartners, and they were in one closet with a, you know, a semi-automatic weapon and within like five seconds, you know, a dozen of them are dead. And we don't do anything about that. Does that set the psychological soil for this continued moral collapse we see right now when you hear about this school in Iran and these girls get killed?

And that was just kind of like, you know, a blip. And now we're just still going on yesterday. You know, the president wakes up and it's, we're going to wipe out of civilization. What, how much do you think our obsession with guns has eroded our morals in this country? Well, in the book, I tell the story of a mass shooting that happened here in Nashville in 2018, the Nashville Waffle House mass shooting. And it was for me, one of, I mean, there's so many mass shootings. There's more than one mass shooting a day in the United States right now, statistically.

We have more guns than people by. quite a long shot. And so part of the story I tell in the book is about this horrific mass shooting that happened in the middle of the night in a waffle house to incredibly just innocent people who were out enjoying a meal, which was fraught with all kinds of racial

and political tensions the shooting was. And it's exactly what you're asking in your question, which is I asked this question of, it was really, I've studied guns now for quite some time. And this was one of the clearest example of how a shooting could have been stopped by red flag laws and background checks and assault weapons bans. And instead, what happened after the shooting is what we see happened after pretty much every mass shooting, which is that half the country says we need more guns and half the country says we need more laws.

And we're literally talking about really different languages, different responses, different notions of safety. And so part of the story I tell in the book is what have we become as a democracy? It's really a threat to democracy. For me, not being able to address the problem of mass shootings was a flashing sign a decade ago about the failure of our democracy, that we couldn't come together to keep people safe in schools, in workplaces, places where you shouldn't have to worry about dying. And so part of the story is about the failure of our democracy

to find common cause after these horrible moments. And so part of what I ask is, what have we become as a democracy, if we can't keep people safe in this way. And the other part is in line with exactly what you're asking, what have we become when we habituate violence like this? I mean, who habituates shootings and violence like this? It's soldiers in wartime. But in the United States, we've habituated just the daily flow of,

I mean, you hardly even hear about it on the news anymore. And so the other story is, what does it mean for our country that we've normalized this kind of violence? And I explore a bunch of different avenues in the book that have to do with politics and race and finance and region and really try to lay out a plan for how we can do better as a country. And I feel like if we fix the gun problem, it'll make it easier to fix the democracy problem. Yeah, I think so too. Somebody that I love very much that worked for me. He died in October of 2024.

He was shot. And it was an attempted robbery in a parking lot. It's a beautiful person. And this was at the election and I just thought, okay, I want Kamala to win so we can really tackle this gun problem. Because I think if you live in America long enough, somebody you love will get shot. Those are just the statistics. And it happened to me. And now I feel like I heard or read an article that Trump's,

Civil Rights Division in the DOJ, they are going to make sure everybody has more gun rights. It's just this insanity, and I just can't help but think there is just a massive through line and the moral erosion of kids getting killed in Connecticut and then kids getting killed in Iran, and they're just alerts on our phones and we just keep moving. What other countries have any similar gun laws that we have? Are there any similar? You know, in the book I study, you know, Australia is often used as an example. I've done a lot of research in the Middle East where there are a lot of guns.

I've looked at Scotland. I think the kind of the common through line is that country, there's no one policy, especially in the United States right now. I mean, we've got about 330 million people. and probably about 450 million civilian we own guns. So we're not going to fix this with any one policy. But I think the common through line of countries that have in the past addressed this directly is that they've had, first of all, a political process where people will get together and make

compromise and say, look, we're going to lock ourselves in the room. Like even Australia, for example, it wasn't like it was like, okay, we're just going to have gun control tomorrow. There was a lot of contested feelings on all sides, but people said, look, we're going to the country first. And so it's a sign of a healthy political process that people are willing to compromise. So that's part of it. But in the book, I actually, I come to, for me, some unexpected conclusions, which is that, again, I'm a policy person, but I, it's not like I've given up on policy, but I think given the number of guns we have and the incredibly polarized feelings about guns

and the ways that gun sales go up after, you know, after a protester is killed in Minneapolis, all of a sudden liberals are buying guns. And after George Floyd, black Americans are buying guns, guns become a response to feelings of uncertainty. And so in the book, for people, hopefully people can get through it by the end, I argue that this isn't just a public health problem. It isn't just a policy problem. It's also really a call for us to come together and build structures

where people feel structurally safer around one another. I lay out a kind of 10-point plan for why I think we need to do that, because people kind of need to feel safe around their neighbors or else we're just going to keep repeating the cycle which isn't just a cycle about shootings which is horrific enough in itself but it's also spikes in gun sales targeted to particular audiences after any particular news cycle which is you know also scary in different ways okay last question we recently saw in the mayoral election in new york city you saw people come out and vote for a man that was polling at 1%, a man who platforms universal human rights, a man who ran on

taxing the wealthy. And in this instance, you saw the inverse of what your book buying of whiteness claims. And you saw white people in Manhattan and very wealthy neighborhoods voting against their economic interest. And so do you see that as a template for our way out of here? in teaching moral clarity and that trickle-down economics don't work and that we need to, such a lie, and that we need to lift up, you know, the most marginalized in our society, and that be the baseline. How did that whole race? Because for me, it was really, I have a lot of

hope about that. And so how do you interpret that into all of your analysis? And I know they're different electorates. You're talking about New York versus Southerners. But this idea that if people see their government deliver materially for them that maybe we could have change. Well, you know, I could talk another whole show about that question because I think there are a couple important points. First, I make very clear when I write and when I talk that I'm not talking about whiteness as like a biological or a genetic category. I'm talking about it as a kind of historical category of people who feel like they are threatened by the advances of other groups of people. And so in that sense, I do think that there is hope for, I mean, again, I'm speaking to you from Tennessee this morning.

It's not like whiteness has always meant the same thing in Tennessee. We've got the Civil War whiteness in Tennessee, but we've also got, you know, Al Gore and a state that came together to build the first public-private health system in the 90s. And so we're all kind of in this cycle right now where I guess the way to summarize this is I do think that there is a common cause center that kind of strength. to get out right now where we say, look, government isn't working for everybody or infrastructure's not working for everybody. So let's invest. Let's reallocate. Let's build better roads and schools and bridges and safety systems. And in that sense, I did find a lot of encouragement in the New York election because I did think that people were saying, look, let's create infrastructure that's going to work for people. I know my own feelings about the promise of health care reform in New York.

We're very great about addressing inequalities. But I also think there's a caveat, which is that we're all part of the same kind of media cycles that push the extremes and try to marginalize or silence the center. And so my research really shows the importance of people coming together in common cause and really trying to figure out how government can work. So I, like you, I'm very hopeful for New York. I hope that things change. And again, I think there's always going to be this kind of tension between. fixing things for the most people and seeing government work, which I think is a great model for the US and for the world,

but also resisting the everything is somebody else's fault. I mean, for people who know my work, I really try to resist stereotyping any group of people and try to say, like, let's understand people's drives and motivations so that we can see who's an enemy and who is willing to collaborate with us in ways that we might not expect. This has just been fascinating. So, listener, make sure you go by.

professor Jonathan Metzell's books. There are many. And I want to thank you so much. I'd like to have you come back on again. I think this is a time where we need to have smart people and experts on television or on YouTube at all times because it is so importantly listen to the people that have actually done the work. Thank you so much. It's my honor.

Thank you very much.