Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

thebignewsletter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 44 posts

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#31

Post by lapcat »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #30
lapcat wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Guess how many Americans support capitalism, look up the polled number, and see if it surprises you. Guess how many Americans support Medicare For All, look up the polled number, and see if it surprises you. None of the populist Democrats that I'm aware of have run on abolishing capitalism, not even self-described socialist Bernie Sanders. Not Mamdani either. It's just a question of how much of a role we allow the…

> Guess how many Americans support Medicare For All, look up the polled number, and see if it surprises you. I predict that it's a large majority, >60%, and am unsurprised to see a poll saying 65% ( https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/11/medicare-for-al... ). As with universal background checks, the challenge is not coming up with a slogan that gets lots of support but refining it into a concrete policy proposa…

> I predict that it's a large majority, >60%, and am unsurprised to see a poll saying 65%

Yes, and I don't think I'd be surprised about how many Americans support capitalism. I generally support capitalism.

> healthcare reform shouldn't affect which doctors they can see

> no Medicare For All proposal could even approach

Of course you couldn't keep your plan but why couldn't you keep your doctor when all doctors would be under the single government plan? It's not like the public loves health insurance companies.

> the American Medical Association opposes Medicare For All, and people generally trust doctors more than politicians about healthcare.

This seems like an equivocation. People don't necessarily trust doctors about politics. Moreover, trusting your doctor is not the same as trusting the AMA.

> Again, this is something where I'd encourage people to put themselves in Chuck Schumer's shoes.

Never.

> there aren't enough swing voters

Why in the world would you conclude that in the 1980s?

You know, Jimmy Carter did win in 1976, and was pretty close in California despite losing. (Carter had already become so unpopular in 1980 that he was primaried by Ted Kennedy, before he faced Reagan.) Dukakis was also pretty close in California. It's crucial to note that Ronald Reagan was the Governor of California, and Richard Nixon was Senator from California, so they had home state advantage there. Even poor Mondale won his home state of Minnesota. And note that California had a Democratic Governor (Jerry Brown) in 1980.

> If you're behind right now and want to start winning elections, you simply can't start from the premise that anyone who identifies with the other side is unreachable.

I would submit that 2020s Republicans are not 1980s Republicans. After decades of right-wing media indoctrination, Republicans are now detached from reality and believe all kinds of crazy things. Approving of Trump after everything Trump has said and done is not even remotely the same as approving of Reagan.

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#32

Post by RickJWagner »

ploden wrote: post #2

The problems in the US are systemic. There will be no significant change without abolishing the two party system.

The problems with the US are less than the problems in the countries where the flood of wishful immigrants are coming from.

The fences on many countries are to keep people in. For the US, it is to keep people out.

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#33

Post by RickJWagner »

andrewmutz wrote: post #5

These days the policy positions of each party are hashed out on social media by non-experts. For both the democrats and the republicans, instead of any sort of research or experts driving public policy decisions, it's instead the things that resonate with your average person's feelings as they scroll through their feed and get engagement. The end result is of course populism. Each election cycle gets us closer to the…

Your point is valid.

Last election cycle, the incumbent president was pushed out of the race, largely initiated by an actor that lacks a college degree.

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#34

Post by bigbadfeline »

andrewmutz wrote: post #16
TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe these researchers and experts should show up and present their suggested positions. People are tired of ivory tower proclamations, and most fundamentally, you need to reach people where they're at. That's just the kind of information ecosystem that we're living in, so people need to adapt. Unfortunately, ignoring the public sphere and pretending that professionals are above such things is why we're now stuck wi…

Experts post on social media all the time, but their voices are not given any weight beyond that of people who aren't experts on the topic. RFK jr running HHS is the wave of the future. Unfortunately, we will continue to have non-experts who generate high engagement content running policy decisions more and more in the future.

> we will continue to have non-experts who generate high engagement content running policy decisions more and more in the future.

I don't see why you'd assume that only non-experts will generate high engagement content.

I don't disagree but such a sweeping assumption surely needs some argumentation and elucidation. Understating the mechanics of this quite unnatural state of affairs is vastly more valuable that the mere observation of its existence.

All I've seen to date are appeals to human nature but that's a highly misleading line of reasoning that creates more confusion about both human nature and the forces driving content creation.

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#35

Post by bigbadfeline »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #27
andrewmutz wrote: post #5

These days the policy positions of each party are hashed out on social media by non-experts. For both the democrats and the republicans, instead of any sort of research or experts driving public policy decisions, it's instead the things that resonate with your average person's feelings as they scroll through their feed and get engagement. The end result is of course populism. Each election cycle gets us closer to the…

So far you get to choose between moderate right and far right, so at least there's still a long way there.

Not really - that would only be true if far right and far left were far apart in anything other than superficial rhetoric. The structure and operation of power are virtually the same for both.

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#36

Post by vkou »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #13
vkou wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful what you wish for. It's most likely that the only replacement for a two-party system the US will get... Will be a one-party system. Because there is no legal pathway[1] towards solving the conditions that create the two party system, but there are many illegal offramps that will get rid of one of those parties. --- [1] There are way too many obstacles, and the bar for consensus is too high to legally have…

That's true at the federal level, but it's possible to get past the two party system at the local or state level where there's allowance for voter initiatives. Portland's new city council setup, with four districts and three representatives each based on ranked choice voting, is a step in that direction.

Once this problem is 'solved' at the federal level, what makes you think the feds won't similarly solve it at lower levels.

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#37

Post by vkou »

thrance wrote: post #19
andrewmutz wrote: post #5

These days the policy positions of each party are hashed out on social media by non-experts. For both the democrats and the republicans, instead of any sort of research or experts driving public policy decisions, it's instead the things that resonate with your average person's feelings as they scroll through their feed and get engagement. The end result is of course populism. Each election cycle gets us closer to the…

What experts? You mean the overpaid consultants who dragged the democrats into pathetic ineffectiveness and made them lose against an obviously retarded manchild? > The end result is of course populism. Each election cycle gets us closer to the policy positions of the Republicans being "Immigrants are bad" and Democrats being "Billionaires are bad". Except immigrants have nothing to do with how bad things are going,…

Ah, but that same populist left is inconvenient to the valuation of my RSUs, so we're going to have to put a cork in it, maybe we can revisit it once I have enough[1] money.

---

[1] I will never have enough money.

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#38

Post by computerthings »

andrewmutz wrote: post #10
rpcope1 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I agree with you that my words are unpopular. Populism is popular. Government and economics is complicated, so it's not that crazy to suggest that your average person doesn't understand it very well. The medical analog of economic populism is antivax and free birth content. Super popular online, but leads to bad outcomes.

[dead]

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#39

Post by TulliusCicero »

vkou wrote: post #36
TulliusCicero wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true at the federal level, but it's possible to get past the two party system at the local or state level where there's allowance for voter initiatives. Portland's new city council setup, with four districts and three representatives each based on ranked choice voting, is a step in that direction.

Once this problem is 'solved' at the federal level, what makes you think the feds won't similarly solve it at lower levels.

Not sure what you mean by 'solved' here.

Re: Even in a Populist Moment, Democrats Are Split on the Problem of Corporate Power

#40

Post by hulitu »

criddell wrote: post #3
ploden wrote: post #2

The problems in the US are systemic. There will be no significant change without abolishing the two party system.

A lot of people are worried we will soon effectively have a one-party system.

You have a 1 party system with 2 fractions. There really is not so much difference between democrats and republicans.
Post reply on HN