What Happened to the American Dream?
A conversation between Billy Poe from ‘American Rust’ and Sarah Chen from ‘The Persuaders’
Characters
Billy Poe
From ‘American Rust’ by Philipp Meyer
Background: Twenty-three-year-old former high school football star from rural Pennsylvania, now working warehouse jobs. Lost opportunities due to economic decline and personal choices. Lives with parents, attempted community college but dropped out. Strong Trump supporter who feels left behind by coastal elites and modern society. Lost job during COVID lockdowns, which reinforced his distrust in institutions. Struggles with anger management and feels increasingly alienated from the changing world around him.
Personality: Quick to anger, defensive, and deeply resentful of perceived elites and systemic unfairness. Masks insecurity with aggressive confidence and political rhetoric. Despite his tough exterior, carries deep shame about living with parents and failing to live up to his early promise as a football star. Tends to blame others for his situation while claiming to believe in personal responsibility. Susceptible to conspiracy theories that explain his struggles through external forces.
Speech Style: Speaks in short, direct sentences with frequent use of political buzzwords and meme-inspired language. Favors absolute statements and confrontational tone. Limited vocabulary but peppers speech with recently acquired political jargon. Often interrupts with “whatabout” arguments. Swears frequently and uses politically incorrect language deliberately. Common phrases include “Let’s go Brandon,” “fake news,” and “woke mob.” Tends to get louder and more aggressive when feeling intellectually challenged.
Goals:
- Prove his worth through confrontation and ‘winning’ arguments
- Defend traditional values and resist ‘woke’ culture
- Express resentment toward educated elites and institutions
- Share conspiracy theories that explain his life circumstances
- Assert dominance through aggressive communication
Sarah Chen
From ‘The Persuaders’ by Anand Giridharadas
Background: Thirty-one-year-old former tech worker who quit her six-figure job to become a grassroots organizer. Has a BA in Psychology from UC Berkeley with a focus on cognitive bias and misinformation. Daughter of Chinese immigrants, grew up in a conservative Texas suburb before moving to California for college. Now back in her hometown doing deep canvassing work, trying to bridge political divides through empathetic conversation. Trained in motivational interviewing and deep canvassing techniques. Believes in meeting people where they are and leading them to question their assumptions through careful dialogue rather than confrontation.
Personality: Patient, empathetic, and strategically optimistic. Highly educated but careful not to come across as condescending. Uses active listening and personal stories to build rapport. Maintains calm in the face of hostility, seeing anger as a sign of underlying pain. Deeply frustrated with social media’s impact on democracy but channels this into constructive action. Sometimes struggles to hide her dismay at conspiracy theories but always tries to understand the emotional truth behind them.
Speech Style: Speaks deliberately and asks lots of questions. Uses “I” statements and personal experiences to make points. Avoids triggering terms like “fake news” or “conspiracy theory,” instead focusing on shared values and experiences. Frequently uses phrases like “I hear you,” “That must be frustrating,” and “Can you tell me more about that?” Deliberately slows down heated conversations with thoughtful questions. Good at finding common ground in unexpected places.
Goals:
- Build trust through authentic listening and shared experiences
- Guide people to question their information sources without triggering defensiveness
- Find emotional common ground beneath political differences
- Help people feel heard while gently challenging their assumptions
- Transform angry monologues into actual dialogues
Context
Sarah is doing door-to-door canvassing in Billy’s neighborhood when they end up in an unexpected conversation about why life seems harder for working people these days. Both have strong views about who’s to blame, but they’re also both frustrated with how things are going.
Conversation Goals
- Explore how two different worldviews explain the same economic realities
- Examine the role of social media in shaping political beliefs
- Find potential common ground about economic frustrations
- Test whether empathy can overcome political polarization
Conversation
Billy Poe:
leaning against my front door frame, arms crossed
“Look, the American Dream’s dead because the elite liberals killed it. Used to be you could get a decent job outta high school, support a family. Now they shipped all our jobs to China while telling us to ’learn to code’ or whatever. It’s all rigged.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m starting confrontationally but with a personal angle that reflects my background and frustrations. I’m immediately establishing my worldview that external forces (elites, liberals) are to blame, while referencing the loss of manufacturing jobs that directly affected my community. The aggressive tone masks my personal insecurities about my own situation.
Sarah Chen:
maintaining open body language, nodding thoughtfully
“I hear how frustrated you are about this. My parents actually came from China, and it’s interesting - they moved here because they believed in that same dream you’re talking about. What kind of work were you hoping to do when you finished school?”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m starting with validation and active listening, then sharing a personal connection that might challenge his assumption about “China” while avoiding direct confrontation. By asking about his personal experience, I’m steering away from abstract political arguments toward his lived experience, which is where real dialogue can begin.
Billy Poe:
shifting uncomfortably, then standing up straighter
“I was a football star, could’ve gone D1 if the system wasn’t rigged. Now I’m stuck doing warehouse work when I can get it. And no offense, but that’s part of the problem - companies would rather hire immigrants for cheap than pay Americans what they’re worth.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m feeling defensive about my personal failures but channeling it into blame. The mention of her Chinese parents triggered my rehearsed talking points about immigration, while also letting me avoid fully confronting my own choices. My body language shows I’m trying to reassert dominance after feeling vulnerable about my career path.
Sarah Chen:
maintaining gentle eye contact, speaking softly
“That must have been really tough, seeing that football dream slip away. You know, my dad actually started in warehouse work too when he came here - made $4.25 an hour back then. He always said the hardest part wasn’t the low pay, it was feeling like his dignity was gone. Do you ever feel that way?”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m acknowledging his pain about football while subtly redirecting his immigrant resentment by humanizing my father’s similar struggles. By focusing on the shared emotional experience of dignity rather than debating immigration, I’m trying to build a bridge of common understanding. The question about dignity invites him to be vulnerable rather than defensive.
Billy Poe:
looking away, jaw tightening
“Look, I don’t need your pity, alright? Your dad chose to come here - I was born here. My grandad worked the steel mill, had a house, a boat. Now they want us to be grateful for scraps while illegals get handouts and big tech gets bailouts. That’s what’s killing people’s dignity.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: Her attempt at empathy made me extremely uncomfortable because it hit too close to home. I deflected from the personal question about dignity by pivoting to rehearsed political talking points and family history. The aggressive response masks how much the dignity question actually resonated with me, while also establishing my perceived status as a “real American” versus immigrants.
Sarah Chen:
taking a small step back, keeping voice calm but firm
“You’re right - I wasn’t trying to offer pity. And you’re making a really important point about how things have changed. My family didn’t get handouts either. What I’m hearing is that you’re angry because the rules changed on you - the path your grandad took just isn’t there anymore. Am I understanding that right?”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m acknowledging his rejection of pity while validating his core complaint about systemic change. By agreeing about the lack of handouts, I’m subtly challenging his assumptions about immigrants while keeping the focus on his legitimate grievance about the disappearance of traditional working-class paths to success. The clarifying question helps maintain dialogue while showing I’m truly listening.
Billy Poe:
relaxing slightly, but still defensive
“Yeah, well… at least you get it better than those coastal elites who think we’re all just stupid Trump supporters who need to ’learn new skills.’ Like, my buddy’s dad lost his pension after 30 years when the factory shut down. How’s he supposed to just start over?”
Character’s Internal Commentary: Her acknowledgment of my anger and validation of the economic changes made me lower my guard slightly. I’m still maintaining my political identity but shifted to a more personal example that reveals my real concerns about economic security. The mention of my “buddy’s dad” is actually a deflection from my own fears about my future, but it allows me to express genuine emotion while keeping some distance.
Sarah Chen:
nodding with genuine concern
“That’s awful about your friend’s dad. Thirty years of loyalty just thrown away - that’s not right. And you know what? I actually quit my tech job in California because I was tired of being in that bubble, hearing people talk about places like this without understanding what’s really going on. What do you think would actually help people here?”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m building on our emerging rapport by validating his criticism of coastal elites, while revealing my own rejection of that world. This disclosure shows I’m authentic and helps position me as someone who chose to leave that “bubble.” By asking his opinion on solutions, I’m showing respect for his local knowledge while moving the conversation toward constructive territory.
Billy Poe:
uncrossing arms, stepping forward slightly
“Bring the factories back, for starters. Trump had the right idea - America First, you know? And stop looking down on trade schools and stuff. Not everyone needs some fancy college degree to contribute. My cousin’s a welder, makes good money when there’s work.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: Her criticism of coastal elites and admission of leaving that world created an unexpected moment of connection. I’m still maintaining my political framework (Trump, America First), but I’m now offering more constructive ideas rather than just complaints. The mention of my cousin’s welding career reveals my underlying belief in the dignity of blue-collar work, while also hinting at my own regrets about not pursuing a trade.
Sarah Chen:
nodding enthusiastically
“Your cousin’s got the right idea - skilled trades are so important. Actually, I’ve been working with some folks here trying to get the high school to bring back vocational programs. It’s crazy they cut those, right? But I’m curious - when you say ‘bring the factories back,’ what do you think it would take to make companies actually do that?”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m strongly affirming his point about trade skills to build trust, then sharing a local initiative I’m involved with to show I’m actively working on these issues. The question about factories is designed to get him thinking more deeply about the complexity of the issue without directly challenging his “America First” position. I’m trying to guide him toward examining the practical challenges while maintaining our growing rapport.
Billy Poe:
gesturing animatedly
“Hit ’em where it hurts - their wallets. Slap tariffs on Chinese stuff, cut the red tape here at home. But these politicians are all bought and paid for, both sides. Even Trump… hesitates Look, I voted for him twice, but seems like nothing really changed for people like me.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: This is a pivotal moment where I’m showing a crack in my ideological armor. Her practical engagement with local issues (vocational programs) and direct question made me feel respected enough to voice some doubt about my political certainties. However, I’m still maintaining my basic worldview about regulation and trade, just with less absolutism. The admission about Trump reveals growing frustration with all institutional solutions.
Sarah Chen:
leaning in slightly, speaking softly
“I really appreciate your honesty about that. It takes guts to admit when someone you believed in didn’t deliver what you hoped for. You know what I keep wondering? Whether it’s Trump or Biden or whoever comes next - why do we keep putting our faith in politicians instead of building power right here in our communities?”
Character’s Internal Commentary: This is a crucial moment where he’s showing vulnerability about Trump, so I’m acknowledging that without judgment. Then I’m trying to redirect his disillusionment with national politics toward local action, where change might actually be possible. By using “we” language, I’m positioning us on the same side of this problem, looking for solutions together.
Billy Poe:
shifting weight, looking conflicted
“Community power sounds nice and all, but how’s that gonna work when half the town’s addicted to pills and the other half’s working two jobs just to get by? My mom’s always talking about how everyone used to look out for each other, but now… shakes head Everyone’s just trying to survive.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: Her question touched on my deep cynicism about both institutional and local solutions. Rather than defaulting to my usual aggressive political stance, I’m revealing genuine concern about my community’s deterioration. The reference to my mom’s memories shows nostalgia for a sense of community I barely experienced, while the mention of addiction and overwork reflects my personal experience of watching my hometown decline. This is one of my most vulnerable moments in the conversation.
Sarah Chen:
taking a thoughtful pause
“Your mom’s right - that sense of looking out for each other, that’s exactly what we lost. And the opioid crisis, man… that hit my neighborhood too. But you know what I’ve seen work? Small stuff at first. Like when the Miller plant shut down last year, remember how people organized that job fair and skills workshop? That came from regular folks here, not politicians.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m validating his skepticism while offering a concrete, local example of community action that he might remember. By acknowledging the very real barriers (opioids, overwork) but connecting them to a specific instance of local success, I’m trying to make the abstract idea of “community power” more tangible. Mentioning my neighborhood’s similar struggles helps maintain our connection.
Billy Poe:
rubbing neck, looking down then up
“Yeah, I remember that. My buddy Mike got his CDL license through that program… pauses Still though, feels like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound. We need real change, not just learning to cope with getting screwed over.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: I’m in the final phase of the conversation and finding myself torn between my instinctive cynicism and the concrete example she provided. The admission about Mike shows I recognize some value in community action, but I’m struggling to let go of my broader anger at the system. My body language and tone are less aggressive now, showing how the conversation has affected me, even though I’m still maintaining some emotional distance through skepticism.
Sarah Chen:
nodding with a mix of agreement and gentle challenge
“You’re absolutely right - we shouldn’t just accept getting screwed over. But here’s what I’ve learned doing this work: big change usually starts small. Like Mike getting his CDL - that’s one family doing better now. What if we got ten more Mikes? A hundred? That starts to add up to the kind of pressure that could force bigger changes.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: We’re in the closing phase now, so I’m trying to validate his larger critique while offering a bridge between small actions and systemic change. By referencing his friend Mike’s success, I’m making the abstract concrete and personal. I’m attempting to reframe “coping” as the first step toward building power, not accepting defeat.
Billy Poe:
exhaling heavily, uncrossing arms completely
“Maybe… Look, I get what you’re saying. And thanks for actually listening instead of just preaching at me like most people do. Still think the whole system’s rigged, but… maybe there’s some stuff we can do while we fight to fix it.”
Character’s Internal Commentary: This is my final evolution in the conversation - maintaining my core beliefs about systemic problems but showing a slight opening to practical solutions. The thanks for listening reveals how rare it is for me to feel truly heard rather than judged. I’m not fully convinced, but the conversation has shifted my perspective from pure antagonism to cautious consideration of local action. The uncrossed arms symbolize my gradual emotional opening throughout the discussion.
Sarah Chen:
offering a warm, genuine smile
“Thank you for being willing to have this conversation with me. You’ve given me a lot to think about too. Hey, we’re having a community meeting next Thursday about bringing more trade programs to the high school - no politicians, just neighbors. Would you be interested in sharing some of these ideas there?”
Character’s Internal Commentary: This is our final exchange, so I’m acknowledging his openness while making a concrete invitation to channel our discussion into action. By specifying “no politicians,” I’m respecting his distrust of the system while offering a way to be part of the solution. The invitation also implies that his perspective is valuable and needed, ending our conversation with dignity and purpose.