A Quote by E. J. Dionne

The New York Times had a headline on its website - Trump Turning To Ultra Wealthy To Steer Economic Policy. This doesn't sound very populist to me. Today's commerce secretary, the names being talked about for treasury secretary, I think there will be populist talk but maybe no populist action.
Has Donald Trump ever called himself a populist? I don't think Donald Trump's ever called himself a populist. I think other people have called him a populist, and other people have called Steve Bannon a populist. But I don't think Trump's ever called himself that and he may not know what one is, within the political realm or definition. He's not a political person, and that I think is leading to many people having just a devil of a time translating the guy, analyzing the guy, predicting the guy, projecting the guy.
I just think, realistically, there's a lot of room outside the Trump populist right and the Bernie-Sanders-Elizabeth-Warren populist left. There are a lot of us who believe in open trade, open borders, a dynamic forward-looking economy, not a nostalgic economy, but do want to provide a significant level of social service or sort of economic Milton Friedman foreign policy, Ronald Reagan domestic policy, Franklin Roosevelt. And there's a lot of room in the center.
Anything popular is populist, and populist is rarely a good adjective.
I come from a working class community in eastern Scotland, and I've always been a populist, though not a patronising populist.
If you can't be a populist in Arkansas, you ain't going to be a populist in Washington.
It’s easy to see why politicians would be drawn to the populist pose. First, it makes everything so simple. The economic crisis was caused by a complex web of factors, including global imbalances caused by the rise of China. But with the populist narrative, you can just blame Goldman Sachs.
I think Mitch McConnell and, to a degree, Paul Ryan - they do not want Donald Trump's populist, economic nationalist agenda to be implemented. It's very obvious.
If I were Donald Trump, I would definitely not pick Mitt Romney because it's very easy for Mitt Romney to have have a separate foreign policy operatus in the State Department that would run a dissenting foreign policy from the White House foreign policy. There, I think the populist America-first foreign policy of Donald Trump does run against a potential rival.
I think Donald Trump is truly a populist.
The difference between us and the other side is that they use populist and...kind of slogans that are...they fool the people. They are the kind of dishonest and populist slogans that we are not willing to use.
I think Trump had this general populist agenda but has not been particularly adept at using the levers of power in Washington.
In truth, the 'populist anger' fueling Trump's coalition is fundamentally different from Sanders' 'progressive populism.' The superficial similarities between the two end when they talk about solutions.
Populism is folkish, patriotism is not. One can be a patriot and a cosmopolitan. But a populist is inevitably a nationalist of sorts. Patriotism, too, is less racist than is populism. A patriot will not exclude a person of another nationality from the community where they have lived side by side and whom he has known for many years, but a populist will always remain suspicious of someone who does not seem to belong to his tribe.
I think Donald Trump's had a pattern of leaping on the bandwagon of anything that he feels will further his candidacy, and if that means sowing more fear and paranoia and playing into a kind of xenophobic populist strain, then that's what he will do.
If we say leaders are incompetent, we are going to fuel extremist, populist, xenophobic and ultra-nationalist parties.
I've always been interested in the news, but I've always been interested in what's popular. I've always had a little bit of a populist take on things. Which I know is interesting when you talk about Donald Trump.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!