No doubt, so I think the focus needs to be around the electoral system that rewards populism as a viable strategy. There were more than two options available this election than Clinton or Trump: you could vote for a third party, or you could stay home. This is the worst thing about first past the post voting, which rewards strategies like Trump's. He can win with only a quarter of voter support, by fostering apathy so those who don't want Trump to win, but don't feel strongly pro-Clinton, won't be motivated to stand in line and vote. We saw this happen on a smaller scale with Ford in Toronto. 30% of the voters supported him, and 70% would absolutely never in their lives cast a vote his way. He could still compete, since populists can rally a broad base, while the remaining 70% could fracture in to groups where no one is > 30%, as they debate policy and ideas. It's awful that there's a voting system in place where reasonable discourse and dissent are actually losing strategies.