You're viewing a single thread.
The last populist TV personality worked out great, so why not?
"Popular" would probably be more accurate.
populism as an ideology that presents "the people" as a morally good force and contrasts them against "the elite", who are portrayed as corrupt and self-serving ... Populists typically present "the elite" as comprising the political, economic, cultural, and media establishment, depicted as a homogeneous entity and accused of placing their own interests, and often the interests of other groups—such as large corporations, foreign countries, or immigrants—above the interests of "the people".
By that metric, anything that is critical of capitalism is populist.
Really becomes a meaningless phrase.
Is Jon Stewart considered a populist?
I would consider him one, since he hasn't held public office before. But I'm not sure if there's a more strict definition.
It's generally defined by a claim to represent some unified idea of the "true people" as opposed to the corrupt elites running everything.
Stewart is not pretending to represent anyone, he's just a guy highlighting problems and making jokes on television. If he ran for office he could decide to use populist or non-populust rhetoric.
I think Volodymyr Zelenskyy was more recent than Trump but I would need to check the dates.
Stewart isn't a populist and neither is Volodymyr. Being popular isn't the same as populist.
What kind of outerspace rationalizing nonsense is this?
The Democrats should be forced to nominate him, just to even things out.