Looks to me like Hillary Clinton's campaign is shaping up to

[MineralMan]

22. That's not my point at all. To win the presidency,

a candidate must appeal to a very broad group of voters, most of whom will never learn anything about policy at all. Populism is a strategy, not a political position. It's crucial to winning a presidential election. Obama won because of it. Hillary lost. She appears to have learned something.

We talk a lot about policy here on DU. The vast majority of voters never even think about policy. Campaigns are about getting votes, and not about much of anything else. If you don't appeal to the voters who never consider policies much, you will lose the election. That's not a good thing, but it is a reality.

If Hillary is the candidate after the convention, whether she wins or not is going to depend on her ability to appeal to voters who have no idea about policies. They won't learn. They don't care. They only want to know if they'll somehow do better if a candidate is elected. That's the essential message of all presidential campaigns. How well each candidate succeeds in telling that story to the voters determines the outcome.

That is why, when I canvass in my precinct, the first thing I say to anyone I talk to is a question: What is your main concern about this election and the candidates? When I learn that, I'm able to tell them why the candidates I support are the best choice. It's not DUers who decide who wins. Not by a long shot. It's people who could not tell you a single thing about any policy. They have basic questions and issues. Answer those effectively and you have their vote.

Populism as a tactic is what wins. Nothing else matters in terms of actual voting results. Reality.