I liked the thrust of his Trump article, probably the best thing he's written in the last year or so:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-america-made-donald-trump-unstoppable-20160224He's been a bit all over the place since coming back to Rolling Stone after his version of The Intercept called Racket fell apart. (Though he's not the only one who has run into issues with First Look's apparently poor management.) It's seemed like less of his old long form and focused reporting+rant style and more of this nearly incoherent at points and thesis lacking Bernie article. The bank one is better since it seems to have an actual thesis, but it's still way mailing it in like Kara said, rehashing the same ol same ol.
Maybe he's just transitioning like a lot of these younger "left" writers (Ezra, Greenwald, etc.) into plain ol opinion writing whereas they had cut their teeth before on a level of investigation (direct reporting, looking at data, whatever it was) that others weren't to go with it. And they since dedicate less time to that.
One factor may be their transition into editorial/management positions. I think Greenwald mentioned something about underestimating the shift from working at The Guardian and being able to just do whatever he wanted compared to The Intercept where he's overseeing other people, setting editorial policy, etc. along with trying to do his own work. Ezra may have similar thoughts on that. But now I'm rambling, because I have no oversight and no real responsibilities.
