Mitt Romney is now identifying so called gifts the Obama administration gave to his supporters as the reason for his defeat in 2012 (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/11/14/romney_blames_loss_on_obama_gifts.html). Romney says the administration rewarded certain constituencies like the young, African-Americans, and Latinos with benefits that led to their votes for Obama in 2012.
It seems as if these gifts are merely good policy. If the Republicans argued that tax cuts for working class families led to their voting Republican in 2012, why would that be any different than the so called gifts the Obama administration gave? Essentially, Romney's argument seems to be that Obama enacted policies that helped the American people, and they rewarded him with their vote.
Jindal is right to call out Romney on this new excuse for Romney's failed election. If wise policies are actually the reason voters turn out to vote for candidates, it seems good for democracy.
RG
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Is the conservative media the enemy of conservatives?
I was surprised on election night to discover the predictions of many conservative commentators. Karl Rove, Charles Krauthammer, Dick Morris, Newt Gingrich and others were all predicting a Romney win, some of landslide proportions.
These pundits seemed genuinely shocked and surprised that their predictions did not come true. Conservatives seem to be living in a political bubble where they only believe information they want to believe, where they decry objective analysis of information contrary to their prior belief systems.
The lack of objectivity of the conservative media is undermining the effectiveness of the conservative message. Fox News and its ilk are feeding the conservative right drastically incorrect information about the state of the world. The denial that others don't think exactly like they do, and therefore information which indicates others do view the world differently, is undermining the effectiveness of the Republican party.
While I understand ginning up the polls to bolster conservative turnout, continuing to sell a fundamentally untrue message eventually backfires. How can Fox News viewers take the predictions of these pundits seriously anymore?
The Republicans would be better off accepting fundamental realities in objective polling data. It is strategically unwise to merely assume the country is something which it is not.
As we watch the battle between the conservative Republicans and moderate Republicans unfold for control of the party, the more fundamental question is whether or not the party will just be honest with itself and hire rigorous pollsters like a Nate Silver to tell them the fundamental truths about the American electorate--even ones they don't want to hear.
RG
These pundits seemed genuinely shocked and surprised that their predictions did not come true. Conservatives seem to be living in a political bubble where they only believe information they want to believe, where they decry objective analysis of information contrary to their prior belief systems.
The lack of objectivity of the conservative media is undermining the effectiveness of the conservative message. Fox News and its ilk are feeding the conservative right drastically incorrect information about the state of the world. The denial that others don't think exactly like they do, and therefore information which indicates others do view the world differently, is undermining the effectiveness of the Republican party.
While I understand ginning up the polls to bolster conservative turnout, continuing to sell a fundamentally untrue message eventually backfires. How can Fox News viewers take the predictions of these pundits seriously anymore?
The Republicans would be better off accepting fundamental realities in objective polling data. It is strategically unwise to merely assume the country is something which it is not.
As we watch the battle between the conservative Republicans and moderate Republicans unfold for control of the party, the more fundamental question is whether or not the party will just be honest with itself and hire rigorous pollsters like a Nate Silver to tell them the fundamental truths about the American electorate--even ones they don't want to hear.
RG
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Time To Get Serious About Our Economy
A presidential commission has convened and has offered up plans to make serious cuts in the federal budget deficit (see: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-10/deficit-panel-s-plan-would-seek-to-cut-social-security-mortgage-deduction.html).
The problem is that both sides, liberals and conservatives, are wincing. Liberals don't want to see any curbs on Social Security and Medicare, the conservatives don't want to see any reduction in tax breaks or the defense budget. Because of these disputes, it is unlikely that fourteen of the eighteen panelists will come up with a consensus view on how to cut the deficit, and any legislation is unlikely to ever come up for a vote (see: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1018968620101110).
In other words: more of the same. Both sides don't want to take the deficit seriously. The United States is facing a crippling deficit that could leave the country in the same shape California is in, and that Greece already went through earlier this year.
Serious times demand serious actions. The days of cutting every tax you can find and spending as much as you want are over. Action to increase taxes and to reduce sacred cow spending are long overdue.
Instead of continuing to vote for politicians that tell us exactly what we want to hear, it is time to vote for adults who will do what is necessary. Unfortunately, it is the message Americans don't want to hear, and certainly don't want to vote for.
And thus, no serious solution is likely to come out of Washington, DC.
RG
The problem is that both sides, liberals and conservatives, are wincing. Liberals don't want to see any curbs on Social Security and Medicare, the conservatives don't want to see any reduction in tax breaks or the defense budget. Because of these disputes, it is unlikely that fourteen of the eighteen panelists will come up with a consensus view on how to cut the deficit, and any legislation is unlikely to ever come up for a vote (see: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1018968620101110).
In other words: more of the same. Both sides don't want to take the deficit seriously. The United States is facing a crippling deficit that could leave the country in the same shape California is in, and that Greece already went through earlier this year.
Serious times demand serious actions. The days of cutting every tax you can find and spending as much as you want are over. Action to increase taxes and to reduce sacred cow spending are long overdue.
Instead of continuing to vote for politicians that tell us exactly what we want to hear, it is time to vote for adults who will do what is necessary. Unfortunately, it is the message Americans don't want to hear, and certainly don't want to vote for.
And thus, no serious solution is likely to come out of Washington, DC.
RG
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Lost in the Shuffle
The distinction between the reality of America's economic situation and the beliefs people have about it is surprisingly stark. A few facts to start the post:
*The Dow Jones is up almost 40% under the Obama administration. Today's close was 11,113.95. The close on January 20, 2009, when Obama took office, was 7949.0. A massive increase.
*Growth is well out of negative territory. To be specific: "during 2008 the economy dropped 1.7 percent compared with the year before. We started looking back through the years, and saw only upticks from 2007 to 1950. In 1949, we found our first decline, of 0.7 percent. There was also small declines in 1946, down 0.4. In 1938 was a significant decline of 6.3, and then more declines in 1933, 1932, 1931 and 1930. No statistics are available before 1930." (http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/oct/25/tim-kaine/obama-took-office-during-70-year-economic-low-kain/)
Meanwhile, the projections from today indicate a 2.4% GDP increase for the current quarter (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g2rmqqtJ39LIJbz861BAif1Arliw? docId=fcbe9f5df9f14a21aaa9d9eb81e21785).
*CBO estimates indicate the stimulus saved millions of jobs and boosted the GDP. "Independent analysts at the Congressional Budget Office and in the private sector roughly estimate that the stimulus boosted the level of gross domestic product by about $400 billion this year and raised the level of employment by about 3.3 million." (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/stimulus-worked-but-not-as-well-as-hoped-2010-10-29).
So in other words, the economy has come back from the abyss under Obama. Times were very tough, and while they aren't awesome now, they are better than before.
So why are Obama and the Democrats in trouble? The facts have been lost in the shuffle.
While the vast right-wing conspiracy can be blamed, the real fault lies in the Obama team for not crafting a clear economic message. Republicans have been better about touting unemployment and the deficit as the only relevant economic indicators. Republicans have been better about winning the battle that the stimulus was a waste of cash. Republicans have won the battle that something--although we're not quite sure what--about "Obamacare" is bad.
Obama and his team lost the discipline that was the hallmark of his run for the Presidency in 2008. The team is way off message, and Democrats are jumping ship as well. If the midterms go the way most predict, will Obama learn the lesson that the problem was the message and not the policies?
Or will the Democrats continue their cowardly retreat into the kinds of policies that led to the economic downturn in the first place.
Then we'll really see what gets lost in the shuffle.
*The Dow Jones is up almost 40% under the Obama administration. Today's close was 11,113.95. The close on January 20, 2009, when Obama took office, was 7949.0. A massive increase.
*Growth is well out of negative territory. To be specific: "during 2008 the economy dropped 1.7 percent compared with the year before. We started looking back through the years, and saw only upticks from 2007 to 1950. In 1949, we found our first decline, of 0.7 percent. There was also small declines in 1946, down 0.4. In 1938 was a significant decline of 6.3, and then more declines in 1933, 1932, 1931 and 1930. No statistics are available before 1930." (http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/oct/25/tim-kaine/obama-took-office-during-70-year-economic-low-kain/)
Meanwhile, the projections from today indicate a 2.4% GDP increase for the current quarter (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g2rmqqtJ39LIJbz861BAif1Arliw? docId=fcbe9f5df9f14a21aaa9d9eb81e21785).
*CBO estimates indicate the stimulus saved millions of jobs and boosted the GDP. "Independent analysts at the Congressional Budget Office and in the private sector roughly estimate that the stimulus boosted the level of gross domestic product by about $400 billion this year and raised the level of employment by about 3.3 million." (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/stimulus-worked-but-not-as-well-as-hoped-2010-10-29).
So in other words, the economy has come back from the abyss under Obama. Times were very tough, and while they aren't awesome now, they are better than before.
So why are Obama and the Democrats in trouble? The facts have been lost in the shuffle.
While the vast right-wing conspiracy can be blamed, the real fault lies in the Obama team for not crafting a clear economic message. Republicans have been better about touting unemployment and the deficit as the only relevant economic indicators. Republicans have been better about winning the battle that the stimulus was a waste of cash. Republicans have won the battle that something--although we're not quite sure what--about "Obamacare" is bad.
Obama and his team lost the discipline that was the hallmark of his run for the Presidency in 2008. The team is way off message, and Democrats are jumping ship as well. If the midterms go the way most predict, will Obama learn the lesson that the problem was the message and not the policies?
Or will the Democrats continue their cowardly retreat into the kinds of policies that led to the economic downturn in the first place.
Then we'll really see what gets lost in the shuffle.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Obstructing Obama
After reading today that not a single Republican voted for Obama's stimulus package in the House, I'm confused by the Republican strategy of obstruction. While it seems the Republicans could take principled stands against the use of bailout money and in favor of deep tax cuts, the effort to draw a party-line against Obama's stimulus package sounds like "more of the same" with regards to Washington politics. It could cost the Republicans at the ballot box.
If one lesson can be found in Obama's victory, it is that the nation is tired of politics as usual. People are seeking real answers to the very real problems we confront as a nation. Returning to partisan-line politics is a return to the era of the Clintons and the Bushes. Not only does it risk undermining the efforts to solve the nation's economic problems, it could also cost incumbent Republicans their seats in the 2010 midterm elections.
Now is not the time for politics based on cynicism and partisan bickering. If the nation is to move forward economically, diplomatically, and politically, the time for party-line politics has ended. It would be nice to see some Republicans sign on to the stimulus proposal in an effort to get the nation's economic house back in order.
RG
If one lesson can be found in Obama's victory, it is that the nation is tired of politics as usual. People are seeking real answers to the very real problems we confront as a nation. Returning to partisan-line politics is a return to the era of the Clintons and the Bushes. Not only does it risk undermining the efforts to solve the nation's economic problems, it could also cost incumbent Republicans their seats in the 2010 midterm elections.
Now is not the time for politics based on cynicism and partisan bickering. If the nation is to move forward economically, diplomatically, and politically, the time for party-line politics has ended. It would be nice to see some Republicans sign on to the stimulus proposal in an effort to get the nation's economic house back in order.
RG
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
The Republicans' Circular Firing Squad
Since Obama's victory, the Republicans have begun to play the game that Democrats have been good at for almost a decade: blame everyone else for the failings of the party. Blame John McCain, blame Sarah Palin, blame George Bush, blame Steve Schmidt, blame the message, blame the lack of the use of the internet, blame anyone but yourself.
The truth is that, while the Republicans made some mistakes, they lost one election in a terrible economy, with anti-incumbent fever at an all time high, against the best Democratic candidate since Kennedy. So while the Republicans have some work to do, considering the circumstances, a six-point loss to Obama is not the end of the world.
All this being said:
-The Republicans need to find a messenger: Right now, the blame game is preventing them from finding someone who can unify the party.
-The Republicans should be troubled by their lack of minority outreach: The Republicans are overwhelmingly white, and lost heavily with both African-Americans and Latinos. The party of Pleasantville just won't work anymore.
-The Republicans need an effective economic message: McCain was never good on the economy. For all of his strengths in this climate as someone who could run against the Republicans, McCain never was strong on the economy. The Republicans should find an economic message that resonates with average Americans.
Most importantly, however, the Republicans need to not panic. They won 46% of the popular vote in a nation that had the highest "wrong track" polls in history. George Bush was beyond unpopular, and yet McCain still managed to cobble together quite a few votes across the nation. Now that Bush is gone, the Republicans should look to fashion a more inclusive message that can appeal to some minority groups while speaking to the middle class economically.
The key will be found in the statehouses and not on Capitol Hill. Look for Bobby Jindal to be a lead contender in fashioning a Republican message that can incorporate the concerns of Indian-Americans while building up the middle class.
The last thought is that Sarah Palin is an ineffective messenger: at least for now. Because she was elevated too quickly, her lack of experience haunted her. The Couric interview and the Tina Fey skits on Saturday Night Live came to dominate how people viewed her: as someone well out of her league on issues of the day. While it is far too soon to count Palin out, she should get out of the spotlight, head back to Alaska, bone up on foreign policy experience and a solid economic message, and then get back in the fray. 2012 might even be too soon for her.
RG
The truth is that, while the Republicans made some mistakes, they lost one election in a terrible economy, with anti-incumbent fever at an all time high, against the best Democratic candidate since Kennedy. So while the Republicans have some work to do, considering the circumstances, a six-point loss to Obama is not the end of the world.
All this being said:
-The Republicans need to find a messenger: Right now, the blame game is preventing them from finding someone who can unify the party.
-The Republicans should be troubled by their lack of minority outreach: The Republicans are overwhelmingly white, and lost heavily with both African-Americans and Latinos. The party of Pleasantville just won't work anymore.
-The Republicans need an effective economic message: McCain was never good on the economy. For all of his strengths in this climate as someone who could run against the Republicans, McCain never was strong on the economy. The Republicans should find an economic message that resonates with average Americans.
Most importantly, however, the Republicans need to not panic. They won 46% of the popular vote in a nation that had the highest "wrong track" polls in history. George Bush was beyond unpopular, and yet McCain still managed to cobble together quite a few votes across the nation. Now that Bush is gone, the Republicans should look to fashion a more inclusive message that can appeal to some minority groups while speaking to the middle class economically.
The key will be found in the statehouses and not on Capitol Hill. Look for Bobby Jindal to be a lead contender in fashioning a Republican message that can incorporate the concerns of Indian-Americans while building up the middle class.
The last thought is that Sarah Palin is an ineffective messenger: at least for now. Because she was elevated too quickly, her lack of experience haunted her. The Couric interview and the Tina Fey skits on Saturday Night Live came to dominate how people viewed her: as someone well out of her league on issues of the day. While it is far too soon to count Palin out, she should get out of the spotlight, head back to Alaska, bone up on foreign policy experience and a solid economic message, and then get back in the fray. 2012 might even be too soon for her.
RG
An Introduction to Ryan's Politics Blog
This blog is a political blog to discuss relevant political issues of the day. Look for updates in the post-election season and how these events affect politics, rhetoric, and communication.
RG
RG
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
