« January 18, 2004 - January 24, 2004 | Main | February 1, 2004 - February 7, 2004 »
Here’s a perfect example of why economic populism is resonating with so many voters.
If ordinary people pool some money together and want to run an advertisement about a public issue, a major TV network deems it “too controversial.”
But if Halliburton or Wal-Mart decide to run TV ads to beat down some simmering bad publicity, the major media is all too eager to hand them a megaphone:
Regardless of what happens to Howard Dean in the next few weeks, it’s clear that there is one clear victor so far: populism. It’s not even close. Every candidate is talking about concerns of anxious working class families in an uncertain economy: health care, education, and jobs. As Michael Tomasky puts it:
"The fact that all four remaining serious candidates, three of whom have no organizational backing to speak of, are talking populism means that, this year, that message matters to regular voters."Also, if Kerry continues to gain strength, this Harold Meyerson Washington Post/American Prospect column from the summer of last year is starting to look awfully prescient:
" . . . of all the Democrats, Kerry is probably the best able to win support from all quadrants of the party. In message and manner, Kerry often still fails to connect with his listeners. But if he can put his own house in order, he's the candidate best positioned to unite a party that's not been this angry at itself since 1968."
