One of the most heavily rose tinted glasses articles I’ve read in a while. So many odd comparisons I’m not sure how you reached them. If you think the MAGA anti-establishment energy can be represented or is similar to Fetterman dressing like a slob in congress, then you need to put down the pen for awhile and read some more. The Fetterman attire schtick is for clicks with the media, it doesn’t represent an actual ideology or populist agenda. Shapiro continues to be divisive with his rhetoric and is solely focused on towing the party line and building up his own image. Pennsylvanians don’t need to see him on national morning shows every month. He’s barely done anything remarkable as governor, which is a shame because there were certain things in his campaign that would’ve actually helped all Pennsylvanians. The school breakfast program is by far the best policy he’s put forth. That’s channeling populist energy. More of that, less basketball shorts in the halls of congress.
Thanks for taking the time to read and give a thoughtful comment! As far as my rose-colored glasses go, I suggest you read my article about the cycle of ideological eras. It isn't so much that I'm optimistic, as I believe we are at the end of a Conservative era and going into a Liberal era. Here's the link to the article:
First, I do hear you regarding Fetterman attire, but today's populism is mostly about 95% show and/or image. I mean, what has Trump really done for his "people", other than give fiery F-you speeches? The MAGA crowd is all about clicks, because disaffected angry people eat it up, they want to see the establishment get uncomfortable. Channeling it in a more harmless way, like through dress or calling out his peers can win people over too.
On Shapiro, it seems like the things I mentioned in the article were pretty good things for people. The highway thing alone is really a miracle. Don't want to see him be divisive, but speaking strongly is definitely going to rattle people, but again, that's what populism does. It's not really pretty and can be divisive in action.
The fact is, they did get elected with the help of the people that would make up the "populist" crowd, and took away votes from Trump-voting areas, so they must be doing something right. Maybe they can win you over at some point.
I’m not a Shapiro supporter but I didn’t vote for Mastriano either. When it comes to Shapiro winning in a landslide, it’s much more a result of his opponent rather than his uniting populist message. Doug was so far-right, his entire campaign was centered on the vaccine and the 2020 election. No one wants a candidate to still be talking about things that haven’t been relevant for almost 2 years; he was dead in the water. And for what it’s worth, I’m much more fond of Shapiro than Fetterman. To put it simply, I think he’s a far-left clown who’s completely unqualified for the position. What he went through is tough and I’m not dismissing that, but he’s still unfit to represent us. Just shows you how much of a joke the Republican PA bench is when Dr. Oz loses to a guy who couldn’t string 3 words together at the debate.
WRT MAGA and Trump being for clicks I agree. There is no actual populist movement in America. It’s all “vibes” and feelings right now. Some candidates lean into it or use some talking points, but neither the Republican or Democratic Party have actual populist candidates fighting for populist policies.
The way I see it, it’s a continuation of post-Obama working class malaise. The same people who got Trump elected in the first place still feel the same way they did pre-2016, except with some tiny semblance of hope still in Trump. It doesn’t matter if Trump did or did not materially help them, he represents something no other candidate does. Biden has been fairly pro-worker, but the struggling economy doesn’t win him any points with that group. So yes, while the populist talking points are just for clicks. Fetterman or Shapiro aren’t going to be the vanguard of the new populist movement. I’m sure you won’t agree, but I think the likes of Hawley and Vance are the closest we have to populist congressmen. Even there it’s a very narrow and specific type of populism. If you haven’t read Vance’s book yet I highly recommend it. Not political, deeply insightful. Showcases the exact sentiment 2016 Trump capitalized on and likely be unable to capitalize on again in 2024.
One of the most heavily rose tinted glasses articles I’ve read in a while. So many odd comparisons I’m not sure how you reached them. If you think the MAGA anti-establishment energy can be represented or is similar to Fetterman dressing like a slob in congress, then you need to put down the pen for awhile and read some more. The Fetterman attire schtick is for clicks with the media, it doesn’t represent an actual ideology or populist agenda. Shapiro continues to be divisive with his rhetoric and is solely focused on towing the party line and building up his own image. Pennsylvanians don’t need to see him on national morning shows every month. He’s barely done anything remarkable as governor, which is a shame because there were certain things in his campaign that would’ve actually helped all Pennsylvanians. The school breakfast program is by far the best policy he’s put forth. That’s channeling populist energy. More of that, less basketball shorts in the halls of congress.
Thanks for taking the time to read and give a thoughtful comment! As far as my rose-colored glasses go, I suggest you read my article about the cycle of ideological eras. It isn't so much that I'm optimistic, as I believe we are at the end of a Conservative era and going into a Liberal era. Here's the link to the article:
https://open.substack.com/pub/thinkeratthegates/p/the-stages-of-political-drunkenness?r=28s97t&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
First, I do hear you regarding Fetterman attire, but today's populism is mostly about 95% show and/or image. I mean, what has Trump really done for his "people", other than give fiery F-you speeches? The MAGA crowd is all about clicks, because disaffected angry people eat it up, they want to see the establishment get uncomfortable. Channeling it in a more harmless way, like through dress or calling out his peers can win people over too.
On Shapiro, it seems like the things I mentioned in the article were pretty good things for people. The highway thing alone is really a miracle. Don't want to see him be divisive, but speaking strongly is definitely going to rattle people, but again, that's what populism does. It's not really pretty and can be divisive in action.
The fact is, they did get elected with the help of the people that would make up the "populist" crowd, and took away votes from Trump-voting areas, so they must be doing something right. Maybe they can win you over at some point.
I’m not a Shapiro supporter but I didn’t vote for Mastriano either. When it comes to Shapiro winning in a landslide, it’s much more a result of his opponent rather than his uniting populist message. Doug was so far-right, his entire campaign was centered on the vaccine and the 2020 election. No one wants a candidate to still be talking about things that haven’t been relevant for almost 2 years; he was dead in the water. And for what it’s worth, I’m much more fond of Shapiro than Fetterman. To put it simply, I think he’s a far-left clown who’s completely unqualified for the position. What he went through is tough and I’m not dismissing that, but he’s still unfit to represent us. Just shows you how much of a joke the Republican PA bench is when Dr. Oz loses to a guy who couldn’t string 3 words together at the debate.
WRT MAGA and Trump being for clicks I agree. There is no actual populist movement in America. It’s all “vibes” and feelings right now. Some candidates lean into it or use some talking points, but neither the Republican or Democratic Party have actual populist candidates fighting for populist policies.
The way I see it, it’s a continuation of post-Obama working class malaise. The same people who got Trump elected in the first place still feel the same way they did pre-2016, except with some tiny semblance of hope still in Trump. It doesn’t matter if Trump did or did not materially help them, he represents something no other candidate does. Biden has been fairly pro-worker, but the struggling economy doesn’t win him any points with that group. So yes, while the populist talking points are just for clicks. Fetterman or Shapiro aren’t going to be the vanguard of the new populist movement. I’m sure you won’t agree, but I think the likes of Hawley and Vance are the closest we have to populist congressmen. Even there it’s a very narrow and specific type of populism. If you haven’t read Vance’s book yet I highly recommend it. Not political, deeply insightful. Showcases the exact sentiment 2016 Trump capitalized on and likely be unable to capitalize on again in 2024.