Podcast Summary: The Realignment

Episode 593 | Austin Ahlman and Ben Winsor: Seven Hard Lessons on Economic Populism
Date: February 12, 2026
Host: Marshall Kosloff
Guests: Austin Ahlman & Ben Winsor, Open Markets Institute

Overview of the Episode

This episode centers on the "Seven Hard Lessons Democrats Must Learn in 2026" as elucidated by Austin Ahlman and Ben Winsor in their popular Liberty and Power Substack article. The conversation explores the ongoing political realignment in the US, especially regarding economic populism, the critique of the “abundance” movement, lessons for a populist era, and how Democrats can build a more successful coalition by addressing economic systems, messaging, and the role of policy and personality. The hosts and guests consider why winning economic fights, naming enemies, and centering the electorate’s real interests—not D.C. ideology—are core for the future of Democratic and center-left politics.

Guests’ Introductions & Framing

• Austin Ahlman:
  Reporter/political analyst at Open Markets Institute, rural Nebraska background, claims the abundance movement is fundamentally out of touch with rural and middle America.

  • "A lot of my criticisms of abundance come from a feeling that it is fundamentally out of touch with anything that anybody that I've ever grown up with is asking for from politics." [03:31]

• Ben Winsor:
  Also at Open Markets Institute, former journalist in the US and Australia, frames US “abundance” problems as issues of governance effectiveness, not causes of populism.

  • "I don't think that if the Democratic Party got better at building smart chargers for cars and more housing that that would change those overall trend lines [of populism]." [06:25]

• Marshall’s Position:
  Advocates conversations across factional lines to build bridges; sees abundance as one plank in a broader liberal project.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Real Problem with Polling (11:05–16:39)

• Ahlman: Argues Democratic over-reliance on polling reflects a party with no central values or “tentpole”—only a focus on re-election.
• Winsor: Emphasizes that polling has limits because most “swing voters” are idiosyncratic, not on a classic left-right spectrum. Focus group insights are often more valuable than topline polling.
  • "Most swing voters are idiosyncratic... They're not on a left-right spectrum." [12:54]
• Discussion: The popularist fixation on polling (David Shor, etc.) misleads parties into reactive, rather than value-driven, politics. Polling should be used as a reality check, not a North Star.

2. Lesson #1: Real Life Voters Don’t Want D.C. Centrism (21:51–39:20)

• Key Point: Voters are less motivated by “centrism” as understood in D.C. and more by anti-elitism and anger at the status quo.
• Ahlman: Critiques D.C. “centrists,” like Sinema, as representing an irrelevant style that doesn’t resonate with real-world moderates.
  • “The quintessential D.C. centrist... has no bearing whatsoever... That style of centrism is really, really toxic.” [21:51]
• Winsor: Moderates aren’t just people with ‘in-between’ positions—they’re often independent, angry at elites, and not attached to traditional party divides.

Memorable Anecdote:
Focus groups after 2024 election found swing voters lauded the shooting of a health-care CEO as what would “get the country back on track.” [26:39]

• Further Discussion:
  • Rebranding from “centrist” to “moderate” is common, but real moderation is often just distinctiveness, not centrism.
  • “Extreme views on the economy are the norm among swing voters.” [33:39]
• Obama’s Wins:
  • Obama succeeded not by pure moderation but by harnessing anti-elitism and working-class energy (2008/2012).

3. The Attention Economy: Pick Fights That Get Noticed (39:20–51:23)

• Winsor: You don't control the agenda; you have to ‘pick fights’ to get attention for your issues—Trump is a master of this (e.g., “Build the Wall”).
  • “A message nobody hears cannot convince them of anything.” [39:27]
• Ahlman:
  • The goal isn’t to be the most moderate in response to GOP attacks—a “debate” driven by the other side’s frame is already lost.
  • Dems should be more aggressive—like on healthcare or cracking down on price gouging—to provoke attention and earn media.
  • Lena Khan was a high-profile anti-monopoly enforcer, but the left overestimates her as a public-facing champion—messaging and messenger both matter.
• Memorable Quote:
  • “If the Wall Street Journal is not pissed about your healthcare plan... you are not going to generate the type of attention that you need...” [44:24]

4. Name Your Enemies—and Mean It (55:39–67:35)

• Marshall’s take:
  • Center-left often names the left as the enemy, rather than corporations, unlike Trump who always “punched to his center.”
• Ahlman:
  • Issue group advocacy is essential democracy, not a problem. The actual problem is party actors with no core values, making them vulnerable to interest group capture.
    • “The diagnosis of the problem as the groups themselves... is deflection from the actual problem.” [59:17]
• Winsor:
  • Democrats’ unwillingness to name corporate villains yields the field to GOP scapegoating on “immigrants, trans people, etc.” Naming and fighting enemies (corporate monopolies, etc.) signals credibility and alignment with ordinary voters.

5. Defending Democracy Isn’t Enough—Fix The Economy (67:35–68:46)

• Summary:
  • Winning requires intertwining democracy protection and real economic progress. “Democracy” alone is insufficient as a message; it must connect to people’s material conditions.

6. Don’t Take the Bait on Culture War Attacks (68:46–78:53)

• Winsor:
  • Culture war attacks, like on trans issues, have limited mileage. Economic policies are more potent in driving votes.
• Ahlman:
  • Even in 2024, trust on trans issues was higher for Democrats, showing culture attacks aren’t decisive.
  • “Most of these cultural issues... are downstream of their feelings about society and the economy.” [71:35]
• Conversation:
  • Authenticity matters more than strict platform matching. Swing district Democrats succeed when candidates’ personal style matches the electorate's vibe, not through issue moderation per se.

7. Get Ahead of the AI Backlash (79:59–86:49)

• Marshall:
  • Abundance conversations on AI are driven by coalition-building logic, but this has led to “everything bagel” abundance—trying to be all things to all people, especially techno-libertarians.
• Ahlman:
  • Warns that current “abundance” funding and message is a vehicle for deregulation to benefit tech interests—AI is central to those priorities; Democratic coalition needs to be able to critique big tech, or it is politically lost.
  • “If you are not able to talk [about AI] and meet people where they are... you have nothing to offer to the coalition right now.” [81:30]
• Winsor:
  • Democrats need to frame themselves as the only party ensuring AI’s benefits are widely shared—not just by the tech elite.

8. Welcome the Hatred of Elites (90:50–98:13)

• Winsor:
  • FDR’s “I welcome their hatred” line against economic elites is instructive; Democrats need to be unafraid of antagonizing entrenched interests.
  • “People really do see [Trump] as fighting for them because he's sending a signal that I'm willing to take on and piss a bunch of people off.” [96:16]
• Ahlman:
  • Democracy requires risk, big moves, and willingness to upset entrenched actors. The New Deal worked not because every policy was efficient, but because of urgency and responsiveness.
    • “He just threw all the shit that he could at the wall and saw what would stick because he understood that people were angry..." [93:20]

Memorable Quotes & Moments

• On the gap between policy and presentation:
  “If the Wall Street Journal is not pissed about your healthcare plan... you are not going to generate the type of attention that you need.” – Austin Ahlman [44:24]

• On polling’s limits:
  “Most swing voters are idiosyncratic. They're not on a left-right spectrum.” – Ben Winsor [12:54]

• On authenticity in moderation:
  “Moderate is often a stand-in for heterodox and independent.” – Austin Ahlman [34:39]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Polling as Democratic Achilles’ heel: 11:05–16:39
• Lesson 1: Real voters vs. D.C. centrism: 21:51–39:20
• Lesson 2: Picking attention-getting fights: 39:20–51:23
• Lesson 3: Naming and fighting enemies: 55:39–67:35
• Democracy requires economic delivery: 67:35–68:46
• Lesson 5: Defanging culture war attacks: 68:46–78:53
• Lesson 6: AI as a wedge and abundance’s coalition flaw: 79:59–86:49
• Lesson 7: Welcome elite hatred: 90:50–98:13

Closing Thoughts (102:01–end)

The episode wraps with all three participants agreeing that successful coalition-building and political advocacy require more robust arguments, greater comfort with public disagreement, a willingness to upset entrenched interests, and—perhaps most importantly in this moment—a fusion of ideas across party factions, not endless factional sniping. The goal is to rediscover a politics rooted in meaning, risk, and real fights over the country’s future.

• “Let's work through this together... get the best policy and get the best politics out of it. I think that's the project that we all have to be engaged in right now.” – Ben Winsor [102:09]

Summary Table: Seven Lessons for Democrats

1. Real Voters Don’t Want D.C. Centrism

   • The anti-elite, independent mood is strong; centrism as small-bore D.C. politics is toxic.

2. Pick Attention-getting Fights

   • Don’t try to please everyone; provoke reactions to win attention.

3. Name Your Enemies

   • Be clear on who’s responsible (e.g., monopolists, landlords), not just rival factions or the “far left.”

4. Fix the Economy to Defend Democracy

   • Economic wins are essential for democratic trust.

5. Defang Culture Wars by Refocusing

   • Don’t try to “out-moderate” the right on social issues; authenticity and economic focus are more potent.

6. Get Ahead of the AI Backlash

   • Don’t let deregulation for tech interests define the future; have a real policy offer for the AI era.

7. Welcome the Hatred of Elites

   • Winning coalitions come from challenging entrenched power, not appeasing it.

This summary is a faithful, detailed encapsulation of the wide-ranging and candid discussion between factional critics and sympathetic interrogators within the center-left coalition, complete with notable quotes, context, and a clear path through the critical debates shaping Democratic, liberal, and populist politics in 2026.