IT IS A truism of American politics that the interests of the less educated, like high-school graduates, need better protection. Ahead of next year’s presidential race, President Donald Trump and many would-be Democratic candidates talk up the concerns of blue-collar, industrial workers. Joe Biden, the front-runner to take on Mr Trump, recently launched his campaign from a union hall in Pittsburgh. Mr Trump’s anti-trade policies, his vow to restore American manufacturing strength, and his rallies in industrial cities of the Midwest, suggest prosperity depends most on creating more jobs for the lower skilled.

Yet America—like every advanced economy—increasingly needs to attract the most highly educated talent possible. The high-skilled, who tend to congregate with other high-skilled people, usually in cities and universities, are more likely to be wealth creators, in finance or creative industries and well-placed to exploit new technology. Entrepreneurs, university graduates and others with demonstrable talent are in high demand. How a country attracts and keeps the highest-skilled migrants, therefore, is a measure of its likely future strength.

Historically, America has far exceeded rival countries in appealing to brainy foreigners and putting them to work, for example in how it gets foreigners into employment after they graduate from its universities. But under Mr Trump that crown is slipping.

The OECD, a think-tank for mostly rich countries, this week spelled out America’s problem. In pure terms of attractiveness to the high-skilled around the world, the authors of a new report say that America still ranks as the most popular place. Across seven indicators the think-tank studied for its measure of “talent attractiveness”--including unemployment levels, tax rates, gender equality, how easy it is for the family of a talented individual to settle and more—America still stands out as the most tempting destination for the brainy.

But on a second set of indicators the country fares worse. These include whether an applicant is likely to be denied a visa, how tight quotas are for the highly skilled, and the time and hassle involved in getting an application processed. Count in those considerations and America’s appeal to the most talented international workers falls sharply. The OECD ranks America behind several other rich countries, including Australia, Sweden, Switzerland, New Zealand, Canada and Ireland.

Such rankings can be disputed, and the rush of people who would like to study and work in America is not going to dry up. But the gush might slow. The numbers of international students present in America have already been declining in the past couple of years, for example. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement department counted a 2.7% fall in student numbers this spring (it found just under 1.2m foreign students in the country in March). It is likely that Mr Trump’s talk of “America First”, his hostility towards Muslims, plus his threats to tighten visas that are popular with Indian applicants, do little to make America a more appealing place for foreign talent.

Mr Trump’s proposal early in May to rejig America’s immigration system to focus it more on letting in skilled workers who can meet the needs of the economy—and less on family reunification or the acceptance of refugees—might address some of the concerns raised by the OECD. But that immigration plan is unlikely to become law. It looks unfeasible, given opposition to it from both Democrats in Congress (because it does nothing to accommodate DREAMERS, migrants who came to America as children illegally and have been allowed to stay) and some conservative Republicans (because it isn't harsh enough, for example, towards refugees).

America has long prospered by attracting foreign talent. But any sign that the country is becoming less attractive to skilled foreigners, as the OECD suggests, could mean that America will pay a price down the road.