That's really halfway toward begging the question, because it carries the assumption that the outside/inside thing is mutual exclusive to policy concerns. Hillary is Ms. Inside because, relatively speaking, I think she content with just minor tinkering with the income status quo.

And frankly, I don't think much of pie-in-the-sky hippie BS. That's why certain media painting Bernie Sanders that way mystifies me. He's correct about the increasing concentration of wealth in the U.S. in a real, empirical, factually-supported way. The problem is that advertising is so powerful in politics nowadays, that the rich can obscure obvious economic facts to lots of people. The minimum wage is lower now in terms of real dollars than it's been for much of its history. Marginal tax rates for the rich are relatively low. There's major class warfare going on, but it's the rich who are winning. I think Bernie is actually the candidate whose description is closest to reality. The others are closer to fantasy.

I think the comparison to Trump overstates things. His initial appeal was that he'd be a bully. He appealed to people who wanted to see their enemies pushed around. Trump's outsider stance seemed to launch in large way to pivot against allegations that his political donations showed he was a closet Democrat. Somehow he's claiming he bought political influence in the past to market himself as a crusader against buying political influence.

I disagree with the blogger; Sanders is looking at things from an "our" perspective, not a "my" perspective. There has always been a Venn diagram overlap between populists and progressives, centered around the resentment go various "Big" organisms: Government, Business, banks, for example. However, the reasons that the two groups are angry at these organisms differ. The common ground disappears when you question their motives and/or goals.  Progressives want society to change to benefit those who are treated unjustly. Their right-wing "counterparts" are interested in what's in it for them; the problems of anyone other than their core group mean nothing to them.

I think of a member of my extended family who is resentful of anyone who ain't him (Pardon the grammatical errors, bit that sounds better), from Wall Street types to the people who ride his bus even when they're short of the correct fare. He absolutely hates that the bus company's policy is to allow them on. Because they're the takers who are bringing this country down. And he resents them. In fact, he spent a couple of years resenting them while he was sitting on his couch, because he decided to take a buy-out from his previous employer and collect unemployment instead of retraining for a different job in the company. 

Here's a shocker: he idolizes both Presidents Bush and is very excited that Trump is running. 

It is an opinion column, so mileage may vary.  No argument that Trump's support is significant at this point, but I'm hoping the columnist is right that Trump's support is overstated.  As far as I'm concerned, the sooner he's out of the race the better.  Unless he runs Independent and takes support from the Republican candidate.  I'm ok with that.

Funny. But you see, this is what galls me about the GOP. They want to waste time and money fighting battles that have already been decided: the ACA, same-sex marriage, voting rights, abortion, etc. I wish they'd expend half as much energy addressing our crumbling infra-structure, the wage gap, our broken prison and education systems, and most terrifying of all, our antiquated and decaying nuclear defense systems.

She must be so embarrassed by her brother...

Citizen Trump explains how he will build the wall.

New England Journal of Medicine weighs in on Planned Parenthood.