I think you can distinguish between populisms that broaden who is “the people” and populisms that narrow that definition, and sure the latter has predominated recently, but the last 250 years or so have been a blockbuster for the former in my opinion.

Not saying Grim is defensible but on the broader point I think you’re missing something.

C’mon man, what about the role of narrative here? What if you have it backwards and it’s actually a bid by the left to channel populist energy up instead of down - not some purely descriptive statement that is proven wrong but rather an ongoing political debate?

I think just showing a ratio is even clearer: today's median home prices are at a similar proportion of income to the height of subprime mortgages in the mid 00's and that's been the case in 10 of the last 12 years

I dunno, man, when you extend the time series back further there's a fairly obvious periodization.
'84-'11: 27-year stretch of prices consistently below (with just the mid-2000's creeping up to) 5x income
'11-'21: prices creep up again then mediate
2020 on: prices explode vs income

Once upon a time these were the “taco trucks on every corner” folks because they cared about, like, actual economics and not just centrist triangulation

only 1/5th of the population of the Twin Cities lives in Minneapolis or St. Paul so he's still wrong on the Minnesota merits of it all

It's just a trash opinion from people nominally on the left but lacking any kind of universalism. I'm pretty sure the greatest increases in human capital come from emigration of folks lower down the socioeconomic ladder and at the top it's much more zero-sum.

because the moment courts stop blocking these gerrymanders, each state's congressional delegation is in danger of becoming winner-take-all at the state level, which is just totally democratically untenable