Jen, I’m not so sure we’ll get a retraction. This might just be another one of Obama’s real-time impromptu policy shifts to the Right.
Contentions
10.15.2008 - 10:18 PM
Jen, I’m not so sure we’ll get a retraction. This might just be another one of Obama’s real-time impromptu policy shifts to the Right.
Like it or not, the main reason the Democrats are so exercised about Sarah Palin is that they see her as an empty suit capable of dethroning their own empty suit. Obama was a candidate who seems to have been created as the personification of a marketing research project. That Obama was able to be elected in a center-right country is more due to the weakness of McCain and the ability of Obama to obfuscate his views through a compliant media. Thus we got a vapid narcissist who has voted present on every tough decision he has made in life. Sarah Palin may not be the answer, and my guess is that the media assassins have already finished her off with the type of tabloid trash journalism they seem to have devolved to. On the other hand, Republicans are still in search of a leader who can intelligently argue the opposition point of view.
It’s funny, Obama has hired a toadstool of a press secretary — whose chief virtue seems to be he won’t come close to overshadowing his boss. His predecessor in mediocrity, Scott McClellan did much to damage the Bush Administration in key areas (specifically regarding the Iraq War). The economy is quickly becoming Obama’s Iraq, and is obviously at the top of the nations radar screen. Just like Iraq was initially popular with the American People, Obama’s War on (Behalf Of?) the American Economy seems to be relatively popular since he is riding the goodwill from the election. That will quickly fade once the reality of the recession becomes more and more painful to every American. Will Obama’s ego allow him to admit that he was wrong and embrace a counter strategy like Bush did with the Surge? Perhaps. It is more likely that 2010 will be 2006.
#1 — “my guess is that the media assassins have already finished her off with the type of tabloid trash journalism they seem to have devolved to.”
I’m not getting that vibe, but mostly I would just say that issue is still in the “to be decided” category. Certainly, Sarah Palin is an almost perfect embodiment of everything that the national media despises about America. But so, too, were Nixon-Reagan-Bush/43. And they all won the presidency, twice each. I am content to sit back and let Palin follow her own path for a while. Let’s see how she does in the 2010 election and then compare notes after that.
I am beginning to see a “deer in the headlights” look from my liberal friends about Obama and all of his missteps. Naturally, they don’t criticize him. Rather, they are just curiously silent about his policies. If pushed, all they will say is: “Well, there’s no precedent for this problem or that problem. And we have to do something, don’t we? So, at least Obama is doing something . . .” Maybe they’re beginning to see that their own livelihoods — perish the thought — could be destroyed by Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Frank/Dodd.
It’s pitiable, really. They still can’t face the fact that Obama is some cross between Carter-redux and the Manchurian Candidate. And we’re stuck with him for four years.
I can’t believe I’m saying this but: Give me Biden! Give me Hilary! Give me Kuchinich! Even give me Sharpton! Anybody but Mr. Cool.
My actual concern with Palin – -and I admit I was very excited when she got the VP nod — is that she doesn’t appear to have the necessary intellectual chops to navigate the shark infested waters that face any Republican Candidate for national office. Watching her in the debate with the self-acknowedged intellectual titan Biden was painful — I kept wanting to jump out of my chair and yell the obvious to retort to the plug head moron. Now it could be that she was over coached and although even her critics acknowledge that she performed beyond expectations – -but having grown up reading NR, Reason etc there were certain obvious responses that every well schooled conservative can trot out in the same situation — and they resonate well with the majority of Americans. She didn’t. She is obviously a conservative based on instinct – -which is fine, but she needs to be able to articulate the rationale behind the instinct. She isn’t there yet. I think she may be capable of it. We will see in a couple of years. Meanwhile, I anticipate the Bobby Jindal will emerge as a tough competitor for leadership of the Repubs and he seems to be the real deal.
This is correct insofar as it concerns the general fortunes of the two major political parties; performance outweighs ideological principles when the average American assesses whether he wants the Democratic or Republican party in power. In 2006 and 2008, the American public apparently believed (with justification) that the performance of the Republican party warranted their ouster.
There are, however, two necessary qualifiers. First, performance and the perception of performance are not the same thing. Media prejudice is certainly a factor, but Republicans have done a *very* poor job explaining their positions and shaping the news narratives. Whatever Bush did right, his failure to use the biggest bully pulpit in the world to shape public perceptions, especially after the 2004 election, allowed the media to tarnish the Republican brand far more than it deserved. I know the Bushes disdain the media side of politics, but both of them harmed the Republican party as a whole by failing to use their positions to explain conservative principles and combat media distortions.
The other qualifier is that party preference (and thus the public’s sense of one party’s “performance”) is only one factor when it comes to the presidential election. We can’t really say that Obama was elected on the basis of “performance,” can we? Certainly not his performance as a Senator. If performance were the metric, McCain would have won in a landslide. Obama was far more effective in shaping perceptions and presenting an attractive personality–perceptions of himself as a miraculously competent and intelligent man who would rescue us from all our political troubles, and of McCain as an impulsive old stiff.
Call them the three P’s of politics; performance, perception, personality. The fourth p, principles, does matter. But Obama effectively captured the country’s center-right commitment on economic principles with his promises to cut taxes for 95% and eliminate wasteful and unnecessary programs “line by line.”
Ahithophel,
Could call on the 4 P’s. I hope that gets the commentary of the day. The tetrahedron of politics, each occupying a vertex.
@5 McCain was also incapable of articulating conservative principles in the same way Bush 1 and 2 were. Jeb Bush appears to be different in this respect but I think that the Bush ship has sailed in the presidential political arena You are correct in that Obama captured the country’s center-right voters with “his promises to cut taxes for 95% and eliminate wasteful and unnecessary programs “line by line.” The ONLY reason he was able to do this was that he had no record of doing anything to run on. This stealth tactic is the one that Democrats must use to win National Elections because their core positions are so far out of step with the majority of Americans.
Both Bushes did immense damage to the Republican brand because of their reticence in defending conservative principles. Unfortunately we live in a political environment where appearance trumps substance. (not that either Bush was real in substance an economic conservative either). Republicans need to hit all 4 p’s.
Ahithophel-
Did you catch what Gibbs said about Santelli’s rant? “I also think it’s tremendously important that people who rant on cable television to be responsible and understand what it is they’re talking about.”
That was the entire premise of his boss’ campaign less than six months ago. Candidate Obama was irresponsible on Iraq, NAFTA, Iran, Guantanamo, etc. The shoe’s on the other foot now, isn’t it?
“Whatever Bush did right, his failure to use the biggest bully pulpit in the world to shape public perceptions, especially after the 2004 election, allowed the media to tarnish the Republican brand far more than it deserved. I know the Bushes disdain the media side of politics, but both of them harmed the Republican party as a whole by failing to use their positions to explain conservative principles and combat media distortions.”
Ahithophel, It is generally accepted that Bush didn’t articulate his policies well enough. But why is that assumed? I recall seeing several times articulating his policies and the reasons behind them. Did he not do it enough? Did he not do it elegantly enough? Is there some other reason why he’s perceived to have failed in this capacity? What more should he have done? I’m just curious what your opinion is here.
Credible national leader- that sounds a lot like Bobby Jindal to me!
#3 “I am beginning to see a “deer in the headlights” look from my liberal friends about Obama and all of his missteps.”
Whenever people I vote for are elected, I become afraid because I know that they will disappoint me. It was remarkable that few of the Obama supporters showed any recognition that buyer’s remorse was a possibility.
Also, most college professors, overwhelming avid Obama supporters, have their retirement in TIAA-CREF. The hit on the stock funds there has been enormous. Many of the older professors have lost hundred of thousands of dollars in their retirement funds, and there is no assurance that it will ever come back. Even if they are socialists, it scares them.
Finally, that “deer-in-the-headlights” look seems to be reducing the amount of trolling here and on some other conservative blogs. It is much harder to play defense than offense in politics, and responses that might have seemed clever a couple of months ago are now embarrassing.
11 True. Even the foaming at the mouth liberals at work who were quick to gloat over every McCain/Palin gaffe and misstep are eerily quiet now that the Commander Zero has taken over. I don’t much miss the liberal trolls around here though – -although Johnny Hartland and family were amusing for a while.
#3, GirdYourLoins said:
“Maybe they’re [referring to liberal friends] beginning to see that their own livelihoods — perish the thought — could be destroyed by Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Frank/Dodd.”
That’s an excellent point.
The bi-coastal liberal elites (especially those on Wall Street and in Silicon Valley) thought an Obama economy would be like the heady Clinton years. They conveniently forgot that there was a Republican Congress forcing Clinton to triangulate.
Once it dawns on the liberal elite that Obama+Pelosi+Reid = depressed stock market, high unemployment (even among “the creative class”–media, finance, lawyers, etc.), high interest rates, and stagflation, then Obama won’t be looking so messiah-like.
Obama defeated McCain by about the same margin as Bush 41 defeated Dukakis. After the ’91 Gulf War, Bush 41 looked invincible. One year later, not so much.
I think most people see obama as doing a good job. his approval rating is still way way higher than bushs was except for right after 9/11.
When they roll the bank plan out next week the market will probably go up 500 points.
as for his “gaffes”? i’m not seeing anything on thelevel of, say, the abu graib prison scandal.
definately get sarah palin ready for 2012. it will be easy for obama to beat her. again.
Speaking of trolls.
A 500 point move in the market? I’d say it’s time you called your broker, Lester.
Abu Ghraib, talk about an oldie but goodie, keep it up lester and we may make a historian out of you yet.
Thak’s for the laugh.
“When they roll out their bank plan next week”???
What will they call it? A “do-over”? Geithner, The Sequel? Bank Plan II? Nationalization–The Musical? Bailouts for Bozos? Dialing for Dollars? Pay to Play? TARP Two? (Taxpayer Anonymously Remits Paycheck)
Lester was asleep at the wheel when Tim Geithner made his Congressional debut as Treasury Secretary a couple weeks ago…ZZZzzz
She’s the farthest thing from an empty suit, while the rest talk about ethereal and counter productive things, she built up the State’s reserves, negotiated a pipeline deal, forced the major oil companies like Exxon, to put up or shut up with regards to their oil leases, has pushed corrupt officials out of the way, has sent troops off to battle (the 4/25th to Afghanistan) just this week, Jindal, I’m willing to take a look at, but he’s so deep in the swamps of Louisiana politics, that four years will probably not be enough
forbes- geitners lack of details wasn’t the reason for the drop. that was part of it, but the main reason was his plan wasn’t what the banks wanted.
15- a 500 point move would have been a typical day last fall. Yes, I am going to say the market will go up 500 points next week. we’ll see. It’s what. 7300 or something now? 7800 by friday
Lester–You’d be funny, no hilarious, if your explications weren’t so sad. Geithner revealed his much awaited and anticipated plan, and you’re offering qualifications to the “reasons” the market fell, and continues to fall–explications that are now proof positive of your forecast of a 500 point rise.
I take it back, you are hilarious.
The biggest danger for Republicans will be failing to maintain a tone of respect for the President. The auto destruction of the dems is just a matter of time. We have even begun to get into the foreign policy controversies. Think 1968. It’s gonna happen.
higher than bushs was
Bush’s
geitners lack of details
Geithner’s
thelevel of, say, the abu graib prison scandal.
Abu Ghraib
definately get sarah palin ready for 2012
Definitely
, I am going to say the market will go up 500 points next week. we’ll see. It’s what. 7300 or something now? 7800 by friday
It’s 7365. Should be 7865 by Friday, then …
You’ve got to invest all you have into some near-term call options
worth $0.05 at the moment.
After the sudden 500-point hike that you predict they’ll be easily worth
$0.1 – and you’ll double your money. If the option gets to $0.15, then
you’ll triple your money.
forbes- 500 points. mark my words
21- I’ll probably buy some shippers instead
Predictions test one’s handle on reality, which is why they are so dangerous to make. If you predict and you are correct, you gain credibility and others should pay more attention to what you say. However, if you predict and you are wrong, you lose credibility and people will tend ignore what you have to say.
So how did lester’s prediction of a gain of 500 points in the Dow fare? The Dow closed at 7063 on Friday, Feb 27, 2009, a loss of about 300 points for the week. Nothing more needs to be said.