A Question of Trust
Why Competence, Not Ideology, Is the New Political Divide
This week’s USTomorrow looks at a common thread running through three very different conversations: trust. From Gen Z’s growing unease, to immigration policy breakdowns, to the rise of leaders willing to take political risks, one lesson keeps surfacing—trust isn’t lost because of ideology. It’s lost when institutions fail to deliver competence. And once trust breaks, everything else gets harder.
This is also a central theme of my run for public office at Kopser for Texas.
Gen Z, Instability, and the End of Automatic Trust
In a recent Substack essay, John Della Volpe draws on findings from the 51st Harvard Youth Poll to challenge a familiar narrative. Young Americans aren’t disengaged—they’re unsettled. Financial pressure, rapid technological change, and political dysfunction have combined to make traditional institutions feel increasingly disconnected from daily life.
Only 13% of Americans ages 18–29 believe the country is headed in the right direction. Nearly half say they are struggling financially or just getting by, with the burden falling hardest on Black, Hispanic, and non-college-educated young adults. Inflation dominates their concerns not as an abstract economic indicator, but as lived reality—rent, groceries, utilities, and childcare.
Economic stress is compounded by anxiety about artificial intelligence. As Della Volpe notes, young people are comfortable using AI for low-stakes tasks, but overwhelmingly see it as a threat to job security and meaningful work. In high-trust areas like healthcare, mental health, and major life decisions, they still strongly prefer human judgment.
Trust in institutions has eroded sharply. Both political parties and mainstream media are viewed more as threats than safeguards. While Democrats retain an edge among young voters, support is driven more by caution than enthusiasm. Many young Americans describe Democrats as “weak” and Republicans as “corrupt,” with both seen as disconnected from the realities of young adulthood.
Perhaps most troubling, Della Volpe highlights a breakdown of trust not just upward—toward institutions—but sideways, toward one another. Many young Americans avoid political conversations, feel judged for their views, and question whether those with opposing beliefs want what’s best for the country.
Young Americans aren’t asking for spectacle. They want stability—honesty, competence, dignity, and agency over their future. Addressing wages, housing, childcare, inflation, and the future of work isn’t idealism for this generation. It’s survival.
Immigration: When Execution Breaks Trust
A New York Times investigation examines how early immigration decisions by the Biden administration—made with moral urgency and a desire to reverse Trump-era policies—ended up reshaping public opinion in the opposite direction.
During the 2020 transition, advisers warned that signaling a more welcoming approach, combined with pent-up migration demand, could overwhelm the system and create visible disorder. Those warnings were set aside. The administration moved quickly on values, without the operational plan to match.
The result was a historic surge at the border. Inside the White House, responsibility was fragmented, leadership hesitated to engage publicly, and avoidance became the default strategy. Meanwhile, images of chaos hardened public opinion—accelerated when Texas began busing migrants to Democratic-led cities.
By mid-2024, tougher executive actions reduced crossings. But by then, trust had already eroded.
The lasting impact may be a durable shift in American immigration politics—driven less by ideology than by a collapse of confidence in government competence.
🎧 Listen: How Mr. Biden Ignored Warnings and Lost Americans’ Faith in Immigration (New York Times)
Gavin Newsom and the Politics of Risk
At a moment when Democrats are searching for their next chapter, The Ezra Klein Show sits down with California Governor Gavin Newsom—once viewed as a regional figure, now increasingly discussed as a national contender.
What changed isn’t just the political environment—it’s Newsom’s approach. He has shown a willingness to take risks in a party often constrained by fear of backlash. Since the last election, he’s leaned into conflict rather than avoiding it.
That shift became clear when Newsom launched a podcast and invited outspoken conservatives like Steve Bannon and Charlie Kirk. Instead of staging confrontations, he listened—an approach that unsettled parts of his own base but signaled political confidence. At the same time, he embraced the confrontational logic of modern politics, openly needling Donald Trump using Trump’s own style.
His boldest gamble came closer to home. To counter Texas’s aggressive redistricting, Newsom pushed California to temporarily abandon its independent redistricting system and draw sharply partisan maps instead. The risk was real—but voters approved it decisively.
Still, the central challenge remains California itself. In an era defined by affordability crises, the state is often cited as Exhibit A. The unresolved question is whether Newsom can convert political dexterity into durable solutions—or convincingly defend the record of the state he leads.
🎧 Listen: Gavin Newsom on Power, Politics, and the Democratic Party (The Ezra Klein Show)
All of these stories highlight a simple fact— people are looking for a new playbook. A new way to approach the issues facing us today. That, in large part, is why I have stepped forward to run again for public office. If you want to help me get there, please consider donating here.
Let me know what you are seeing out there.
Joseph
Co-Founder of USTomorrow
Candidate for Texas House District 47
I think a very good example of political risk-taking AND directly addressing affordability concerns is Zohran Mamdani.