The material base of historic populism (HP) derived from the basic pattern of small farmers being repeatedly driven into bankruptcy and servitude by deflation -- the lack of an elastic currency -- and kept there by monopolistic structures with which they were forced to do business for survival -- railroads, middle-men, and local suppliers.
If we grant that capitalist crises are 'solved' by recession, which entails a deliberate abstention of monetary policy, then the oppression of Money remains with us, if in a less dramatic form than under HP. An imminent, related aggravating factor will be the new bankruptcy laws we can look forward to under Pres. Schrub.
As for monopolies, now we have Microsoft and uncompetitive deregulated utilities, among other things.
Moreover, employment is under continual pressure to transform into a 'contractor' relationship wherein every worker is a small producer obliged to function in a spot market, rather than under long-term arrangements.
So there remains a material base for populism. It just looks different.
On a different note that has been raised, it's not a question simply of adopting a U.S. vocabulary or lingo, though that is a necessary condition. Yoshie's ultra- cosmopolitan marxism or the blanket of moral condemnation that Carrol would have us all visit upon the nation as a consciousness-raising exercise are perfect tickets to political oblivion.
It's a matter of engaging popular concerns in a comprehensible language, where such concerns are symptomatic of the Big Issues -- economic security first and foremost, in its major dimensions (employment, income, social insurance).
mbs