There is a diary on what is wrong with it, so there may as well be one on what is right with it for balance at the very least.
The points made in that diary are fair ones from a certain perspective but they are deeply flawed from a point of political striking power. And this is what I mean by it: Although the persons that implemented the populists platform planks were NOT populists it was the populists that made it possible for those positions to brought into reality.
Because populists VOTE, they show up, they fight and they are committed to a set of positions not a party.
And that is as much a weakness as it is a strength.
Lets look at this a bit more below the fold, though not to much as I am running low on battery power on the laptop...
One of the points that is fair to criticize populists on is that there is an inherent "us vs them" dynamic, because there is. Now where that criticism falls down IMHO is that it makes no attempt to consider WHY that is and decide whether that is a fair reason if the reviewer were in a similar position.
The reason behind the above paradigm is fear and not regrettably an easily dismissible irrational one far to frequently. And since we may as well face the 800# gorilla in the room sooner rather then later; the current bugbear that puts off some liberals in regards to populists is immigration.
Now I am going to go out on a limb( not all that big a deal to do on a blog but still), and explain the reason that the two aforementioned groups don't see eye to eye on the issue on one of the possible vectors: The degree of impact upon each of their lives of the issue.
A significant portion of the populists have their lives or the lives of people that they know impacted by the issue to a deeper degree then the liberals that find the populists distasteful. That impact can take the form of how much of their personal identity is tied up in their national identity; populists tend to be a bit more nationalistic then certain strata of liberals who like to see themselves as above such nonsense. That in turn will put the populists off on that strata of liberals in specific and liberals in general due to their association with them. That is not fair, but it is all to human and tragically stupid on both parties part as it sources from the same character fault: Pride. One is perhaps overly proud of their nation and the other is perhaps overly proud of their intellectual superiority. The net result is the same a bunch of arrogant wankery while the country burns.
Some have that impact coming from direct economic impacts; ask meat packers who have seen their wages stall and then retreat over the last 20 years partially because of the employment of the illegal/undocumented worker. I can't blame the unions for getting the new guys a union card but it doesn't do a whole lot of good when your major bit of leverage the strike is unusable because of the immigration status of the workers represented. All management has to do is call ICE and POOF their problem goes away.
The same strata of liberals that have the biggest problem with populists also gain the most benefit from those same immigrants, or have it least impact their economic lives, and in some cases other reasons that I do not wish to touch on.
Now here is the thing: The populists can be and would likely more then willingly compromise on much of their position on this subject but they have to have a reasonable expectation that they will be protected by those running for office. And trust me when a certain strata of liberals go out of their way in far to many cases to give them the impression that they hold them in contempt.... that won't modify their positions but rather harden them and leave them open to those with a truly unhealthy agenda.
And they do deserve protection here because they are the citizen, the voter, the guys and gals that pay the elected' check. They have a point that the aforementioned strata of liberals tend to demean and devalue in ways that come across far to much as an arrogant elite.
And since populists are vehemently against arrogant elites that will tend to put them off on liberal causes because of the experiences with them.
Populists are not evil people but they are people that tend to crop up when to much bullshit has been allowed to accumulate in the political arena and fairness has been abused.
You can either make common cause with the common man and rule this land or you can alienate them and live in the political wilderness screaming at the wind.
But for the last century or more the party that incorporates the most populist positions and delivers on the bigger portion of them, tends to win.
And only the winners get to make law.
Capice?