→ Economy
Chart of the Day
| Wed Sep. 30, 2009 2:08 PM PDT
Longtime political analyst Charlie Cook thinks there's a good chance that Democrats could lose control of Congress in next year's midterm elections. Independent voters, he says, are "viscerally" worried about the deficit and hyperactive government.
I wonder. The deficit is a pretty abstract thing, and "hyperactive government" doesn't necessarily mean healthcare and the stimulus bill. When it comes to voter discontent, I think I'd put my money elsewhere. First, as the chart below, from the Economic Policy Institute, shows, people are pretty strongly convinced that the finance industry has gotten huge amounts of help from Obama and Congress, while ordinary people have gotten squat. As Ezra Klein says, "The economic logic behind preserving the financial sector was bulletproof. But the electorate is not composed of economists. And all they know is that the banks got a lot of money, and this is the worst recession in memory." In other words, "hyperactive" might be a lot more acceptable if all that activity were aimed somewhere other than Wall Street.
Second, there's jobs. John Judis tells the story here: if you want to be a popular president, you'd better be able to demonstrate some job growth. End of story. Obama still has some time on that front, but probably not very much. If the economy is starting to recover by next spring, he and the Democratic Party will probably be in decent shape when the midterms roll around. If not, not.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
Obama probably can't get any
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 3:22 PM PDT.
Obama probably can't get any help from Congress, but his justice department could get after Wall Street.
It's bad politics to have
Submitted by alex (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 3:39 PM PDT.
It's bad politics to have the DoJ prosecute your major campaign contributors.
Ezra Klein: "The economic
Submitted by alex (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 3:35 PM PDT.
Ezra Klein: "The economic logic behind preserving the financial sector was bulletproof. But the electorate is not composed of economists."
Ezra isn't an economist either. Nor am I. So let's see what folks like Paul Krugman, Joe Stiglitz, Dean Baker, et al, have said.
They've repeatedly said that while preserving the financial sector was essential, preserving specific banks and "banks" (e.g. Goldman-Sachs) in terms of their present ownership and management wasn't. That's why they invented receivership. Instead we got a crooked deal where the Financial Masters of the Universe, who created this mess in a fit of incompetence that would have gotten anyone else fired 10x over, got bailed out. Saving the financial sector enough to keep the real economy from completely dying was just a side effect.
And now we have zombie banks, monetization of debt courtesy of Fed lending policies that directly benefit only the banks, and no prospect of real reform.
Yes, give me a fu**ing
Submitted by g. powell on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 4:24 PM PDT.
Yes, give me a fu**ing break, Ezra Klein. Of course saving the financial sector was essential, but at what terms? You don't need to be freakin' economist to know when you're getting ripped off. Obama and the Dems have proved to be absolute wusses.
Disagree with one point, Alex. Nothing wrong with a little monetizing of the debt as long as it doesn't cause inflation. If only the U.S. had a real stake in the banks that Fed policy was supporting, that would be good.
I agree that there's
Submitted by alex (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 4:45 PM PDT.
I agree that there's "nothing wrong with a little monetizing of the debt as long as it doesn't cause inflation", and in fact we probably have no other realistic choice. What I should have been clearer about is the question of who benefits from the Federal government's Constitutional power to print money, especially in this unusual situation where you can do it with abandon without causing inflation (at least short run) and arguably must do it.
Of course the banks are the only ones directly benefiting from this. How can you fail to make money when you borrow at essentially 0% and lend it out at up to 30%? The old royal monopolies had nothing on this scam.
Receivership
Submitted by Joe S. (not verified) on Thu Oct. 1, 2009 3:55 AM PDT.
There is no way under current law you could do a successful receivership of a hyper-complex institution. We tried it with Lehman, and you saw where that lead.
> Ezra isn't an economist
Submitted by Anonymous12 (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 4:08 PM PDT.
> Ezra isn't an economist either. Nor am I. So let's see what folks like Paul
> Krugman, Joe Stiglitz, Dean Baker, et al, have said.
lol, there's a broad-minded, intellectually curious citizen for you.
Oops, apologies for
Submitted by alex (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 5:01 PM PDT.
Oops, apologies for buttressing my arguments by referring to people with actual expertise in the topic under discussion.
I realize that the time honored anonymous blog responder's approach is to utilize the "pure reason" approach pulled from one's posterior.
I heard a story once that
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 4:22 PM PDT.
I heard a story once that the Bay of Pigs was set up during the Eisenhower Administration as a trap for JFK. And he fell for it.
I think Paulson and TARP were a Bush trap for Obama. And he fell for it.
Fuck Obama. He gave us TARP and TARP II and not a single banker is in jail, and there is no actual Wall Street reform, and Health Care looks to be dying, and he is fucking us over with civil rights, so fuck Obama.
And I certainly hope that's what people are thinking in 2010.
I heard someone from the UK appalled that Obama has yet to demonstrate any actual leadership, and the guy was right.
So fuck any blogger who wants us to pretend it's all good.
There's sixty fu**ing
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 4:25 PM PDT.
There's sixty fu**ing senators and nothin' on.
Well we might' a made some friends with some billionaires
We might' a got all nice and friendly
If we'd made it upstairs
All I got was a note that said "Bye Public Option
Our love is sixty fucking senators and nothin' on"
This analysis completely
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 4:27 PM PDT.
This analysis completely ignores the fact that the Republican party is at crazy-people-only levels of support everywhere but the South. Even if all these people don't like Obama, are they suddenly going to vote for the party they don't like even more in such high levels that the Democrats lose their massive majorities? It doesn't add up.
Hyperactive? Government?
Submitted by Art Eclectic on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 4:29 PM PDT.
Hyperactive? Government?
How about we try "more of the same" government. So far it's hard to tell that we had a party change at the White House. Bankers and insurers still run the country, still bleeding jobs, environmental policy DOA, so-called health insurance reform turned out to be just another way to funnel dollars to health insurers, still fighting costly wars and putting soldiers in harms way for nothing, still propping up corrupt industries like real estate and building, still propping up incompetence in the auto sector.....
Democrats deserve to have their asses handed to them in the midterms.
Economists
Submitted by DWN (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 4:46 PM PDT.
Kevin's correct, peoples experience with their pay check will often determine the course of elections.
So let's see what economists like Krugman and Stiglitz are saying that is directly related to peoples pay check. To paraphrase my understanding: "The free fall has stopped" but "No improvement in the foreseeable future".
The answer: Not
That is why sometimes, policy trumps politics if politicians want re-elected.
What's the deal with the salty lingo?
Submitted by g. powell on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 9:24 PM PDT.
Kevin, why aren't my fucks and shits appearing as I write them? They are perfectly good terms that spice up a comment.
Has fucking Mother Jones gone all prudy us?
Tits post
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 9:42 PM PDT.
A guy who used to be in Washington knew that his phone was tapped, used to answer, Fuck Hoover, yes, go ahead. (laughter) Okay, I was thinking one night about the words you couldn't say on the public, ah, airwaves, um, the ones you definitely wouldn't say, ever, ['] cause I heard a lady say bitch one night on television, and it was cool like she was talking about, you know, ah, well, the bitch is the first one to notice that in the litter Johnie right (murmur) Right.
And, uh, bastard you can say, and hell and damn so I have to figure out which ones you couldn't and ever and it came down to seven but the list is open to amendment, and in fact, has been changed, uh, by now, ha, a lot of people pointed things out to me, and I noticed some myself. The original seven words were, shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits. Those are the ones that will curve your spine, grow hair on your hands and (laughter) maybe, even bring us, God help us, peace without honor (laughter) um, and a bourbon. (laughter) And now the first thing that we noticed was that word fuck was really repeated in there because the word motherfucker is a compound word and it's another form of the word fuck. (laughter) You want to be a purist it doesn't really-it can't be on the list of basic words. Also, cocksucker is a compound word and neither half of that is really dirty.
The word - the half sucker that's merely suggestive (laughter) and the word cock is a half-way dirty word, 50% dirty - dirty half the time, depending on what you mean by it. (laughter) Uh, remember when you first heard it, like in 6th grade, you used to giggle. And the cock crowed three times, heh (laughter) the cock - three times. It's in the Bible, cock in the Bible. (laughter) And the first time you heard about a cock-fight, remember - What? Huh? naw. It ain't that, are you stupid? man. (laughter, clapping) It's chickens, you know, (laughter)
Then you have the four letter words from the old Anglo-Saxon fame. Uh, shit and fuck. The word shit, uh, is an interesting kind of word in that the middle class has never really accepted it and approved it. They use it like, crazy but it's not really okay. It's still a rude, dirty, old kind of gushy word. (laughter) They don't like that, but they say it, like, they say it like, a lady now in a middle-class home, you'll hear most of the time she says it as an expletive, you know, it's out of her mouth before she knows. She says, Oh shit oh shit, (laughter) oh shit. If she drops something, Oh, the shit hurt the broccoli. Shit. Thank you. (footsteps fading away) (papers ruffling)
...
The deficit is a pretty
Submitted by Luther on Wed Sep. 30, 2009 10:56 PM PDT.
The deficit is a pretty abstract thing...
Trillions are scaring people.
Deficits
Submitted by bob h (not verified) on Thu Oct. 1, 2009 4:32 AM PDT.
Yes, I agree that people are really not that concerned about deficits. It is just jobs, and in a year there could be a sense that has turned around.
trapped
Submitted by hollywood (not verified) on Thu Oct. 1, 2009 5:18 AM PDT.
It seems Obama has made mistakes and he's trapped by his own good intentions. He knows he has to get health care/insurance reform through this year and it seems he will (watered down though it may be). He also appears to want to do something to scale back the war, and apparently soon. The problem is these are the right priorities, but it's like taking your medicine. People want to see economic progress before the midterms. I'm not sure that is going to materialize. In fact, things may get worse. Not good for Obama. Not good for the Dems. People will be fed up with government generally even though it's the blue dogs and repugs that are holding things up. All pols in office will suffer.
Double Whammy
Submitted by Ted Frier (not verified) on Thu Oct. 1, 2009 5:58 AM PDT.
Democrats are getting sliced by both sides of the right wing's double-edge sword. First, the right wing puts on its populist hat and paints Democrats as plutocrat enablers for bailing out rich bankers after the Bushies allowed the financial markets to collapse. Then, when Democrats try to even the score by helping average Americans cope with the recession with stimulus and health care programs, the right wing puts on its fiscal conservative hat and warns about tax and spend liberal Democrats heading a government drowning in red ink.
I agree with the poster
Submitted by Th (not verified) on Thu Oct. 1, 2009 5:59 AM PDT.
I agree with the poster above who pointed out the opposition is bat-shit crazy. Republicans will have to defeat incumbent congressmen in an off-year election to gain seats. I would bet there will not be 2 competitive races in my state of Georgia and the candidates who win the Republican primaries in these districts will be the craziest of the crazies. I like our chances.
I also predict that we will see a steady stream next year of announcements of banks paying back their TARP loans, the feds selling their stock back to banks, AIG, etc. and people will be hard-pressed to deny they received a tax cut when they file their tax returns in April. If we have learned nothing else about Obama, the man knows how to keep his powder dry.
Anonymous above is correct
Submitted by markg8 on Thu Oct. 1, 2009 5:59 AM PDT.
The Republican party is as popular as Wall St and insists on acting insane. The give us candidates like Whitman in CA who doesn't even bother to vote and primary one of the few non crazy candidates they have, Crist in FL with a goofball like Rubio. On the House side it's no better. Their guys even get booed at teabagger rallies.
Democrats would be in trouble if there was a strong opposition party but like Anon above says the GOP is only competitive as a regional southern party where people believe Obama is a muslim who was born in Kenya. Nobody would read bother reading Cook - or any tea leave reader - if he took those considerations into account.
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
