It's interesting that Broderick can say "Sure, there are plenty of uncomfortable echoes we can point to, but history doesn’t tend to repeat. The European fascist movement that helped leaders like Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco, and Hitler take power in the 20th century was specific and deeply contextual" and then the very next sentence say "It was a direct response to the political and economic realities of the moment" as if the political and economic realities aren't an echo of Weimar Germany.

There's also this insistence that Democrats lost overwhelmingly, rather than acknowledging the slimmest of margins in an electoral system leads to a representative wipeout. There's no acknowledgement that the policies Trump ran on - deporting illegal immigrants and bringing down prices - have been almost entirely absent from the actions of the administration. Eras of turmoil are eras of populism, same as it ever was, and everyone paying attention knew the dangers. We just underestimated the dissatisfaction.

But they never got around to anything average Americans would care about.

THIS SO HARD

Somewhere or other the WSJ has an article pointing out that those with an affinity for the Democratic Party are more likely to have it for social issues than economic ones. Not unions, not minimum wage, not healthcare, but LGBT issues and immigration. Which works where Democrats win, but it gets you annihilated where Democrats lose. The truly unfortunate thing is when you look at Democratic policies they're overwhelmingly popular... but preserving the Democratic base requires threading the needle between Palestine and Bud Light and it's virtually impossible. It also sucks all the air out of "hey how'd we end up with so many billionaires."