Or if you have a stock portfolio and make your living off of dividends on unheated wealth you could care less about some low paid worker...they are obviously too lazy.

For those people the establishment candidate if just fine...no need to change a thing...or to even talk about it...just vote for the personality and let the good times roll.

Liberal ideals are fine and dandy to talk about. Some even find it kinda fun. It is when the rubber meets the road that the squealing starts.

The New Deal era financial protections served us well for many years. Now the landscape has changed radically at our expense.

“A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people’s property, other people’s money, other people’s labor - other people’s lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness." ~ Franklin D. Roosevelt

"We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob."---FDR, October 31, 1936

of ladders for advancement of the average wage earner those ladders have never actually existed and need to be created, not restored but built from scratch. I don't understand why you think there were formerly such avenues for the average worker when in previous times ladders of advancement were denied to all women, racial minorities and LGBT.

The ladders I'm speaking of are for everyone. Things like a free education, a safety net, a retirement income, medical access etc., not the fact society had an apartheid influence. Are you saying we shouldn't go with things that work because when they were implemented in the past, institutional racism or misogyny, etc. existed and thus they are invalid measures as a means to lift families upwards when applied to everyone? Not trying to be snarky, I'm talking about things that create a middle class.

pointed out that your claim that such ladders for advancement were formerly available to average people was not really accurate. So if you say 'create ladders for advancement' instead of claiming to 'restore' them, others don't have to worry about the hidden bits in the language.
I mean, what specific ladders of advancement were available in the past, that you wish to restore? Do you insist on restoration rather than replacement by more modern and efficient ladders?

I don't want that lost on anyone. I accept your answers, I didn't say it worked for everyone. I understand that society blocked people as well from ascending.