Now, just when was it that the Democrats became a goody two-shoes party? Maybe it was after Watergate and it signed on to a mugwump-style reformism. Or was it when it dumped industrial policy for a panoply of feel-good crusades. Whenever the transition took place, certainly the impact on Democrats was permanent.

Take the current approach to Donald Trump. Some elements of the party still place its future in the hands of Facebook, Instagram and the celebrity class. Waiting eagerly for every Alec Baldwin imitation and applauding Meryl Streep’s jeremiad, they seem to think that indignation is enough to handle Trump. For a group that sees another bike path as the answer to social and economic ills, it is not surprising. The party needs to rethink its positions rather than reacting to every action or appointment of President Trump.

For instance, the confirmation of Trump’s admittedly ultra-wealthy cabinet. Ethics and other objections, perhaps rightly, are brought up, but to much of the public it seems like nit-picking. As well, although men like Wilbur Ross and Rex Tillerson are billionaires, they are not as well known to the voter as less wealthy but still well-heeled celebrities. In some minds, the “Hollywood” crowd is the elite, so unfamiliar is the public with the higher variety. When Trump is hit on this front, he is given a free pass to play a game where celebrities are depicted as the oppressors.

You need not find a better example for this than West Virginia. The Mountain State voted almost 70 percent for Trump and 48 percent for Governor Jim Justice. Businessmen were trusted more so than politicians — including Bill Cole. Trump and Justice are in a bracket that the public cannot fathom and are regarded by some, like feudal lords of old, as protectors of the average citizen against snobbish elites.

Does it completely make sense? No, but there is some truth to the perception that cultural elites have outpaced the public so much that they have lost touch. Huey Long, despite amassing a good deal of money, did go up against powerful corporations because he demanded a piece of the pie. Though he made side deals with those demonized corporations like Standard Oil, it did not dissuade the people from seeing him as a champion. Trump’s public pressure on corporations to keep jobs in America, albeit with a lot of caveats, is seen as a man on the people’s side. This kind of messaging and creation of matchups is not to be scoffed at or dismissed.

It would behoove Democrats to take advantage of the splits within the Republican party. They clearly aimed to manage Trump and every posturing petit criticism helps them in that effort. Not since 1960 has the presidency been such a jump ball. John Kennedy had less a liberal record than Richard Nixon, yet Democrats seized the moment with Civil Rights. The same is true with Trump, who has advocated nothing more than Dick Gephardt did in 1988. Make Trump play in a Democratic box circa the 1980’s, not in the free trade and restrictive democracy of the present day. At any rate, patience is a virtue. With Trump, a superb counterpuncher, it is imperative to give him few targets to hit.

But it is imperative that the Democratic party remain true to its creed of economic justice. Without power there is no justice. Public service unions are no substitute for industrial equivalents. If Trump pursues this course, Democrats should back him to the point that his reluctant allies begin to once again abandon his administration. But sermonettes about ethics will not do the trick.