Our new issue, “After Bernie,” is out now. Our questions are simple: what did Bernie accomplish, why did he fail, what is his legacy, and how should we continue the struggle for democratic socialism? Get a discounted print subscription today !

Donald Trump’s — or perhaps more accurately, Steve Bannon’s — first address to Congress was a master class in doing what Trump does best: combining right-wing populist rhetoric with a mishmash of falsehoods, scapegoating, and brazen corporatism. Despite widespread media reports that Trump has somehow turned over a new leaf simply by learning to read a teleprompter, the president that spoke before Congress cited just as many lies and promoted the same xenophobic, pro-corporate, war-hungry policies as the Trump we’ve seen over the last few months. What gave the speech a different flavor, however, was the administration’s signaled intent to refocus on and refine a populist image following a chaotic, politically damaging month. That he largely seems to have succeeded should worry us.

A Populist Pivot Perhaps Trump’s less erratic delivery and slightly more optimistic tone helped produce a generally favorably reception by the public, with 57 percent of people in a CNN/ORC poll reporting a positive reaction, and seven out of ten agreeing with his policies and priorities. But Trump also doubled down on the faux-populism his campaign was built on. And the positive response that doubling down has received, combined with the supposedly presidential, “polished” tone he adopted during the speech, should be eye-opening for progressives and leftists who have assumed Trump would eventually collapse under the weight of his own absurdity and incompetence. Trump mentioned infrastructure six separate times during his speech, including the term “crumbling infrastructure,” one of Bernie Sanders’ favored phrases. He promised a “new program of national rebuilding” akin to President Dwight Eisenhower’s creation of the interstate highway system, promising “new roads, bridges, tunnels, airports, and railways, gleaming across our very beautiful land.” He complained that $6 trillion (an inflated figure) had been spent on war and nation-building in the Middle East, which “could have rebuilt our country twice” — a similar point to one made by Dennis Kucinich in 2003, when he pointed out that withdrawing from Iraq could allow the United States to redirect money to health care, education, and job creation. Sure, Trump’s infrastructure plan is actually a corporate giveaway rather than a Roosevelt- or even Eisenhower-like public works program. But to the average viewer tuning into the speech, that didn’t matter. They simply heard rhetoric about directing much-needed spending to dilapidated roads and railways and putting Americans to work. Keeping with his campaign, Trump also took aim at trade deals. He reminded listeners that he had withdrawn from the TPP as promised (a line that received noticeably less applause from Republicans in the audience) and outlined the negative effects NAFTA had had on US manufacturing jobs. “I believe strongly in free trade, but it also has to be fair trade,” he said, before extolling the merits of protectionism — a virtually unthinkable sentiment to hear from a Republican before a year or so ago. He complained that “we’ve watched our middle-class shrink as we’ve exported our jobs and wealth to foreign countries.” “I am not going to let America and its great companies and workers be taken advantage of anymore,” he said. “I am going to bring back millions of jobs.” Even Trump’s familiar anti-immigrant exhortations were more firmly rooted in economic anxieties. He claimed that overhauling the US immigration system would “save countless dollars, raise workers’ wages, and help struggling families enter the middle class.” He asserted that “enforcing our immigration laws” would “help the unemployed.” Turning to members of Congress who opposed his anti-immigrant policies, he asked: “What would you say to the American family that loses their jobs, their income, or their loved one because America refused to uphold its laws and defend its borders?” No doubt for some that tuned in, this America-first, anti-immigrant rhetoric was simply a reinforcement and reiteration of Trump’s racism. But there’s also no doubt countless others would have tuned in and simply heard a promise to provide unemployed and under-employed Americans with the jobs they sorely needed. No matter how disingenuous such calls are, they’re calls that people want to hear.