Robert Reich wonders whether Obama can pull a Bill Clinton before the election of 2012…
…and his answer is: probably not, but maybe so.
It’s sort of humorous to read Reich on the subject. As a former member of Clinton’s administration, he must know how different the two men are in personality and temperament, as well as the fact that it was far easier for Clinton to successfully tack to the middle and be perceived as sincere because he was never perceived as a doctrinaire man of the left by the rank and file voter in the first place.
And yet Reich ignores these two all-important differences. Instead, he implies that Obama’s problem is that he’s had bad luck: he “isn’t as fortunate” as Bill Clinton was, in that the economy hasn’t recovered while Obama’s been in office. Poor, poor Obama.
Reich’s remedy for the situation is that Obama should focus on fostering jobs’ creation. What an amazing and revolutionary idea! And a good one, too. Only problem is that the American public has heard before from Obama that he will do so, and so far it has failed to occur.
Reich may not recall that, over and over during his presidency, Obama has promised to focus (sometimes like a laser) on jobs. Reich may not recall it, but my guess is that the American people do.
How long a memory voters have is always an interesting question with an unclear answer. Reich seems to think they have virtually no memory at all, and that if Obama manages to pull the job fat out of the fire at the very last minute—or even appear to try hard to do so—the American people will consider his dedication to jobs creation impressive, and gratefully re-elect him. I beg to differ. Even if Reich is correct when he says, “Most Americans care far more about jobs and wages than they do about budget deficits and debt ceilings,” why not also conclude that because they care, they’ve been paying rather close attention to Obama’s cavalier attitude towards jobs, and will remain resentful of his empty promises on the subject?
Bad luck?” “Isn’t as fortunate?”
Ah, the classic warble of the loser, who has no agency in affairs. It’s all a matter of luck, doncha know, and so there’s no need for introspection, self-criticism, or improvement. After all, success or failure is strictly a matter of chance, right?
Obama already cast his laser gaze, his three-dimensional chess intellect, and even the razor-sharp crease in his trousers, on job creation. He gave us an $862 billion stimulus bill that would keep unemployment below eight percent.
“Most Americans care far more about jobs and wages than they do about budget deficits and debt ceilings …”
Or, indeed, more than they do about quantitative easing or stimulus spending for that matter. But the longer the economic woes continue they just might start connecting the dots. Bankrupting the country so your connected pals can stay fleeced isn’t that hard to understand.
He has some slight Clinton-esque experience in “center-tacking”, but I expect Obama’s only political hope is in mass distraction; it’ll be quite interesting to see what forms that takes.
I’m not sure, neo. If people have been paying attention, as you say, and in a way that matters, then Obama can pretty much kiss 2012 goodbye and we can stop worrying.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m very worried. And that can only be because I and the others who worry with me don’t get the sense that people have been paying enough attention (even if they have been paying more than average).
The bottom line is that it doesn’t matter if the average Democrat or Republican is being attentive. They’ll vote to the usual 50/50 wash. It’s the mushy middle, the non-committal “center” and the Independents, whose attention matters – around 10% of the voting public, give or take (there are more self-professed Indies than that, but most Indies are actually partisans).
Are the truly mushy Indies paying that much attention? Enough attention to where, if Obama did manage to pull some jobs-rabbit out of his hat, they would say, “No, no, I still remember how you did nothing for three years! No fool me!”
That is not at all clear, and the latest Gallup poll (I think it was Gallup, though I may be mistaken) suggests not: Obama is deeply underwater on handling the economy – except when compared to Republicans, where he triumphs. If these idiots think Republicans have in any sense had a chance to “handle the economy” in the past year, much less the past two and a half years, there is no way they are being attentive enough for a difference to be made. Most polls suggest that a default would be to the GOP’s detriment as well – again not a good sign of attentiveness.
I find it hard to believe these polls – how can people be so thick? – but there are enough of them to be suggestive. And regardless, even from more right-leaning pollsters like Rasmussen we do not see solid evidence to the contrary.
To a certain unknown extent, what happens depends on which of these stories is true: 1) In tough times, people hang onto whatever lifelines they can, and if those lifelines are threatened, they react negatively; or 2) In tough times, people seek for others to blame, and react negatively against those they hold responsible.
If 1) is truer than 2), then Obama’s demagoguing on entitlements will work; if 2) is truer, by contrast, the Republicans can hope to gain some traction by hanging the economy around the neck of its most visible and vocal captains.
The competition right now is on between the 1-narrative of the Democrats and the 2-narrative of the Republicans, and we frankly don’t know which will prevail – clearly they are both true to a non-trivial degree. But either way, the evidence suggests that to the degree people are paying attention, they are dissatisfied with Obama – but they are dissatisfied more with the GOP.
Just think about how dense one has to be to express such an opinion. And then consider that enough people do to constitute a clear victory for Obama in certain polls. (And if we complain that the polls are biased and misleading – which they are – even that doesn’t help matters. Would any of us here be fooled by a leading question into expressing greater contempt for the GOP on the economy than for Obama? Anyone who would be so fooled must be very flimsy indeed.)
Let’s hope I’m mistaken.
Kolnai, I hope you are too. I cant believe he polls as high as he does, the campaign ads have been writing themselves lately, he is on tape making so many wild statements that can be contrasted with the actual results. I’ve seen one so far.
“”I cant believe he polls as high as he does””
My guess is we’re seeing advanced stages of immature narcissism in Americans (democrats) that will destroy themselves in the quest to make sure no one else is more successful.
People who have not worked in education (high school or college) have no idea how ignorant and unaware the average voter under forty is. All Obama has to do is explain we are in trouble because Republicans are protecting the rich. If the rich paid their “fair share” of taxes, we would not have to cut Social Security and Medicare. Tax the rich is a simple message.
Mr. Frank,
Quite. It’s been working since at least 500 B.C., so I don’t expect the craven populists to abandon it now. However …
Even ignorant and unaware voters can read and understand simple numbers, especially unemployment and growth and most especially when it’s backed up by even casual observation. This isn’t to say the Repubs have it made — defeating “the first black president” will be much, much harder than they seem to think — but banking on ignorance and class war to hide this mess will only go so far. And remember those over 40 make up the bulk of voters.
As kolnai states, independents will determine whether or not BHO stays employed. (BTW I believe they are closer to 20% of the voters.) As individual voters they make their choice based issues that are important to them or based upon a favorable impression of the character of the candidate.
Unemployment is definitely the top concern of voters of every persuasion. And, I think there is a growing apprehension over the deeper economic problem, namely the debt/deficit crisis. Unemployment is the hammer and debt is the nail to pound into the awareness of the independents. This the republicans must do relentlessly. They need a candidate who is credible on these two issues and can pound on BHO on the campaign trail and in the debates.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m very worried. And that can only be because I and the others who worry with me don’t get the sense that people have been paying enough attention (even if they have been paying more than average).
Just watch for the “Summer of Recovery, 2012 edition”. That will tell the tale. If the economy doesn’t improve, if unemployment isn’t better, and if the cost of living is still rising by September, The Won will become The One and Done.
Ignorance and Narrative (programming): The first for the young; the second for Jews, liberals, and blacks.
The vote was extended to the very young–that is fairly new; the immature narcissism that SteveH mentions–that is fairly new;but against both is the tea party and American’s wake-up attempt.
I’d like to call it, but I don’t think anyone can. One thing that does comfort me is that the tea party isn’t going away, and I really can’t believe America will degenerate into Europe. We are seeing the profundity of Abraham Lincoln’s words from his “House Divided” speech.
It will become all one thing or all the other!
http://tinyurl.com/d3a6n6
The issue then was slavery. And so it is now. We are in a war and even if Obama were reelected in 2012, that would not mean we would lose. In fact, ironically, such an event may be what is needed! Who knows, because history is stranger than fiction.
Oh, and the odds are not in The Won’s favor, either. I’m not calling them zero, but they’re closer to zero than they are to 1 in 4…
I have to agree in part with kolnai, and also Reich. the electorate has a very short memory, except when an issue is pounded on day in and day out by the MSM.. a la Iraq. As I said in another thread, what happens in August, September and October, 2012 ia much more important than what happens now. My evidence? 2008. McCain in the lead until the meltdown, the timing of which always was suspicious to me.
Those 10% who determine the election won’t pay atention until Oct 15.
Robt Reich is an utter waste of time.
Parker –
While there is no way to be certain about the percentage of “pure Independents” (rather than shadow partisans) in the electorate, there’s enough cumulative data for there to be a consensus in political science that the number of Independent voters (as opposed to the absolute number of self-identifying “disengaged” – i.e., non-partisan – Independents) hovers around 10%. I’ve dealt with the data myself and all I can say is that it’s robust.
This is a fairly good breakdown (from a progressive site, no less – just ignore the policy stuff):
http://progressivefix.com/how-to-win-back-the-“independents”
Here’s a more bread-and-butter breakdown from the political scientist Alan I. Abramowitz:
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/aia2009082001/
(his estimate in late 2009 was that 7% of voters are pure independents, and it’s a safe bet the number will be within a few percentage points of that on the plus-side in 2012).
Does it matter? Not really. Whether it’s 10% or 20% they still decide the election. But as a matter of understanding the electorate, one shouldn’t be mislead by the 35-40% of them who claim to be Independents. Usually only between 20-10% truly have no party preference, and only about half of them tend to vote.
I R A Darth Aggie Says:
“Just watch for the “Summer of Recovery, 2012 edition”. That will tell the tale. If the economy doesn’t improve, if unemployment isn’t better, and if the cost of living is still rising by September, The Won will become The One and Done.”
Do not ignore the mainstream media factor. Regardless of whether the economy improves, unemployment is better, cost of living is rising,
it is the appearance rather than the reality that sways the only marginally-paying-attention voter. And we know how the mainstream media will want to make it appear.
It’s all uphill, folks.
Life is uphill, M J R!
Super good article on Obama at the following link which destroys the “poor but brilliant man succeeds by hard work” narrative.
I raised an earlier objection to the whole idea that if Obama can succeed at fixing jobs or the economy he will gain re-election. It’s not Obama’s job and unfortunately we don’t seem to be returning to that very simple idea. Nor is it the job of government anywhere.
http://tinyurl.com/65rcgat
Do not underestimate the power of the “tax the rich” mantra upon the unwitting public. Especially upon the younger voters. Tonight at dinner Mr. Random Thoughts and I were discussing the likelihood of the Republicans caving and giving Obama what he wants vis a vis the debt ceiling.
Our college educated, socially conservative and reasonably intelligent daughter doesn’t follow politics, but she listens when we discuss the topic. She asked what exactly Obama wanted. I answered, “Increased taxes.” Daughter then asked, “They’re just going to tax the rich though, right?”
My response was something along the lines of, “Yes, sweetheart, and that means you and me and everyone else who actually has a reasonable income. WE are the ‘rich’ as far as Obama is concerned.”
Obviously she’s heard the phrase “tax the rich” so often it’s stuck in her mind, along with the lie pushed by the Democrats: The “rich” are someone else, not you.
“People who have not worked in education (high school or college) have no idea how ignorant and unaware the average voter under forty is.”
Can you have an Achilles leg? I’ve been watching this debacle with rising dread, and I’m afraid Kolnai and Mr. Frank are right. The only reason this creature is polling a steady 50% or so in favor of his “policies” is that the MSM’s slavish support of his message is having the desired effect on the doltish demos. Who, after all, elected the guy after the J. Wright tapes hit Youtube, and every other glaringly horrible fact about him was made known.
We are so screwed.
“”Who, after all, elected the guy after the J. Wright tapes hit Youtube, and every other glaringly horrible fact about him was made known.””
Beverly
We humans are always in the becoming phase. And right now young people are getting an education on shysters and con men politicians. In many ways we had to get where we are now. Otherwise there’d only be the liberal narrative. But reality bats last and she’s up to the plate.
OB (@1:36 above),
You have exposed THE liberal paradigm. If success is due to chance and luck rather than skill, work and perserverance, then the concept of wealth redistribution makes some sort of warped sense.
Neoneocon,
Regarding the length of the public’s memory, don’t forget that everytime Obama makes a pronouncement on which he fails to follow through, he reminds everyone of each past pronouncement on which he’s failed to follow through.
Kolnai, et. al above,
Regarding Obama’s apparent strength in the polls: the other night Dick Morris pointed out that the undecided pollsters by-and-large swing to the challenger. So that if you take the undecideds and add them to the polling of the challenger then Obama is actually underwater. I’m not a pollster so I don’t actually know how accurate that is, but I would like to think Morris’ experience counts for something.
Random thoughts,
You are correct. The class warfare mantra has always hinged on encouraging the individual to look up the socio-economic ladder and resent anyone above their own rung. “Tax the Rich” becomes redistribute the wealth of anyone above you on the ladder, but the dirty little secret is that those below you on the ladder are looking up at you and agitating for the same thing.
That’s why I’m a conservative, I do not resent someone who has (or has achieved) more than I, nor do I pity someone just because they have less.
SteveH,
Reality bats last . . . .
Should be carved in stone on every public monument.
Superb!
T:
I’ve probably linked this chart before, but here it is again. It was from the Wall Street Journal a couple months ago. It shows exactly who the Marxists mean when they say “tax the rich”:
The Middle Class Tax Target
Obama’s voter base is towards the left end of the chart, and they’re looking our way.
In Venezuela, Hugo Chavez waged war on the middle class, and he is loved by the poor and uneducated.
The Democrats hurt themselves by quickly and confidently passing the “stimulus” and then placing all of their eggs in the healthcare basket.
If the progressives knew their economic bill was not enough, then they were negligent. While if their program was inherently defective, then the progressives have a defective philosophy. I get the sense that people really really want to give Obama a chance to succeed, but don’t like the way things are going and may bail on him at the last minute, like Carter in 1980.
Running on their record will be a tough sell for the progressives, though as Bush proved in 2004, Obama doesn’t need to be the best, just the best of the worst. The Republicans need to run on offering a vision of a better economic future; they’re not going to win a personality content with Obama. I’m convinced that “Generic Republican” can defeat him. Our problem is that “Weird Republican” will not.
rickl,
I haven’t seen that before. Thanks.That’s something else that should get wholesale distribution at least by right-leaning media.
As Yogi Berra said, this is deja vu all over again. When Obama won in 2008, I was convinced that Jimmy Carter was getting his second term. Unfortunately I was right. We need as a candidate someone with the vision and optimism of a Reagan. Romney may or may not be up to the job. His biography as a successful businessman should help. In addition to pointing out government has been the problem, he needs to show that the path to prosperity for all is thru smaller government, less regulation and unleashing the natural entrepreneurial energy of our citizenry.