Overview of Was populism worth it?
This Today Explained episode from Vox looks back at roughly a decade of populism in U.S. politics and asks whether it delivered meaningful, durable change. The discussion argues that populism has reshaped both parties, but has often been better at generating anger and disrupting elites than at producing lasting policy gains. The episode also makes a larger claim: populism rises and falls partly based on the media environment, with radio, cable, social media, and possibly AI all changing how easily anti-establishment movements can break through.
What Populism Means in This Episode
Jonathan Chait defines populism as a political style that:
- Frames politics as a zero-sum struggle between “the people” and a self-interested elite
- Suggests there is a simple, obvious solution being blocked by powerful insiders
- Often identifies a clear enemy to blame for social or economic problems
The episode notes that populism now appears across the spectrum, from Trump-aligned Republicans to Democrats who try to brand themselves as economic populists.
Trump, the Right-Wing Populist Template
The first half focuses on Donald Trump as the most successful modern U.S. populist.
Why Trump’s message worked
According to Chait, Trump’s appeal came from positioning himself against the Republican establishment:
- He attacked GOP elites for favoring tax cuts for the wealthy
- He opposed cutting Social Security and Medicare, at least rhetorically
- He rejected endless wars in the Middle East
- He centered immigration as the main populist issue
Trump’s message resonated because it offered an explanation for why voters felt abandoned: elites were supposedly enriching themselves while ignoring ordinary Americans.
The contradiction of power
The episode argues that populism becomes harder to sustain once a politician is in control:
- In Trump’s first term, he could still claim he was being blocked by the “deep state,” courts, or Republican holdouts
- In his second term, his increased power makes the victim narrative harder to maintain
- He has largely displaced old Republican elites, but not economic elites
In Chait’s view, Trump didn’t destroy the elite structure so much as replace parts of it and fold business leaders into a new ruling arrangement.
Biden and the Limits of Democratic Populism
The episode also looks at Joe Biden as a kind of anti-Trump populist.
What Biden adopted
Biden kept some of Trump’s populist economic policies, especially:
- Tariffs on imported goods
- Protectionist language around American workers, steel, auto, and aluminum
Where it fell short
The problem, Chait argues, was inflation:
- Populists often struggle to address inflation effectively
- Tariffs can actually worsen inflation
- Biden was slow to respond to inflation as the central political and economic issue
The broader takeaway is that populist rhetoric is easier than populist governance, especially when economic conditions become unstable.
The Media Theory of Populism
The second half of the episode shifts to Eric Levitz’s argument that media structure helps determine when populism thrives.
Core idea
Populism becomes stronger when media systems:
- Lower barriers to entry
- Reduce elite gatekeeping
- Allow outsider voices to reach large audiences directly
- Reward emotional, provocative, and anti-institutional content
How Media Technology Shaped Populism
Radio
Radio created a direct, intimate connection between politicians and audiences:
- FDR used radio to build trust and project solidarity with ordinary Americans
- On the right, Father Charles Coughlin used radio as an early form of demagoguery
- Radio allowed populists to bypass traditional institutions and speak directly to listeners
Television
Early television did the opposite:
- It was expensive and highly centralized
- A small number of networks controlled the national conversation
- This gave elites more power to shape political discourse
- The mid-century TV era also coincided with relative political consensus and broad economic growth
Cable and social media
As television became less centralized and digital media emerged:
- More channels and outlets increased competition
- News increasingly favored sensationalism and conflict
- Social media let individuals bypass editors, producers, and institutions entirely
- Influencers and podcasters could market themselves as sources of “forbidden” or hidden truth
This media fragmentation, the episode argues, helped fuel the modern populist era.
Could AI Reverse the Trend?
Levitz suggests AI might slightly counter populism, at least in one narrow sense:
- Many people may increasingly rely on the same major AI models for information
- That could create a more shared informational baseline, closer to the old television era
- AI tools often align more closely with mainstream expert consensus than with conspiracy-driven content
But the episode is skeptical that this will matter if AI contributes to major economic disruption:
- If AI causes mass job losses or worsens inequality, it could trigger a new populist backlash
- Shared answers from chatbots won’t matter much if people feel the system has failed them
Main Takeaways
- Populism has been highly effective at mobilizing anger against elites
- It has been less successful at producing durable, broadly beneficial policy change
- Trump’s success came from attacking Republican elites and claiming to speak for the neglected public
- Biden adopted some populist economic policies, but inflation exposed the limits of that approach
- Media structure matters: populism grows when gatekeeping weakens and emotional, direct-to-audience communication becomes easier
- The future of populism may depend as much on technology and economic stress as on ideology
Bottom Line
The episode’s central conclusion is that populism may not be a lasting solution so much as a recurring political response to inequality, distrust, and media disruption. It can shake up politics and topple elites, but whether it improves people’s lives is much less certain.