Michael Scherer at Swampland notes something we talked about during liveblogging:
Neither candidate has the courage to speak straight with the American people about our nation’s fiscal problems. Asked about the financial crisis, McCain talked about energy independence, hitting the same talking points he used in July. Obama talked about the need to give tax cuts to the middle class, and expand spending programs, a proposal he put forward last year. Both men have proposed policies that will lead to an increase in the deficit, according to independent analysts, even without a dramatic economic downturn, which looks increasingly inevitable. Neither man has shown any clear intention to tell Americans to face head on the hard economic times that await us. This is politics. The candidates are playing it safe, not telling voters anything they don’t want to hear. They choose to demagogue Wall Street instead. Let’s just pray that after the election, the winner drops this politicking and becomes the bold, honest leader both men claim to be. The nation will need it.
I used fewer words:
9:13 pm- They are both full of shit. This economy is in a deepening recession, and the economy is going to get much worse.
Among the number of things that really concerns me is that there still has not been an honest appraisal of how bad things are right now, even when both candidates were given a chance to talk about sacrifice last night. There are, I think, some very tough times ahead. We don’t just have a crisis in confidence right now, we have a deep structural problems and a mountain of debt and an aging population that has been promised a great deal of entitlement money and I just don’t see any end in sight. Things are really a mess.
On top of all that, Matt Yglesias has a good post up about how right now, spending cuts on the federal level may be the worst thing possible. While there is no doubt that Obama is the superior candidate of the two, this lack of openness about how bad things really are is depressing. I understand it, as no one can run on a platform of “You all are going to have to do with less,” but that is the reality, in my estimation.
Leo
Here‘s an awesome comment from Redstate:
You see, the problem with elections in America is that they focus too much on policy and not enough on pandering platitudes.
Billy K(hrushchev)
"You all are going to have to do with less" is true, and I’m sure at least Obama knows it, if not McCain. But the moment either says that, they lose the election.
Assuming I’m right, would you still like Obama to say it?
Edmund Dantes
It’s simple really. The last president that had the gall to tell the American people life isn’t all rosy, and they are going to have to sacrifice has been villified as one of the worst presidents by pundits, commenters, and most people that reflexively have integrated the propaganda without realizing it.
Go back and re-read the speech Carter gave. The one that is used against him so much by Republicans, pundits, and Reagan’s campaign. It was a sober assesment of what was happening, and a plan for the sacrifices we would have to make to get out of it.
America decided it would rather stick it’s head in the sand and pretend "it was morning in America". It worked for 30+ years, but the bill is finally coming due for America’s aversion to facing the reality that has been there since the late 70’s
Phoebe
Go Edmund.
slaney black
Wall Street/Big Media/Political Class to voters:
"Oh noes! They’re gonna do something that might not primarily enrich us! Let’s dump an assload of cash on ourselves before they fritter it all away!"
Sorry rubes, no healthcare. We already done spent the money!!!
DBrown
Yeah – Edwards; truth does not elect anyone, voters do and they only respond to positive spin that telss them all will be done for them at no cost except by others
Comrade Incertus
Example: Walter Mondale. He called Reagan out on his "I won’t raise your taxes" bullshit and lost 49 states as a result. (I’m sure there were other factors, but that’s what I remember–I was 16.)
Soylent Green
First you have to get elected.
Most people know who they will be voting for. The debates are aimed at the remaining dummies who know so little about the issues that they can’t make a rational choice between two guys who are poles apart.
They aren’t interested in statements about issues, truthful or otherwise, or whether the candidates’ proposals make any sense. They are choosing between personalities on the basis of their feelings. They don’t want to be informed, they want to feel good.
donovong
What Edmund said. Double.
And, in addition, both candidates were wrongly skewered last debate because they "dodged" the question of what they would have to cut from their programs if elected. Any idiot who tries to predict what is going to happen in this shitstorm is just that – an idiot. If they paint too rosy a picture, they are criticized as being unrealistic. If they claim that things are going in the shitter faster than we can ever stuff our mattresses, millions more are going to panic. Who wins that argument?
Joshua
McCain has also mocked Obama for not saying what he will cut, but Obama can’t go on stage with a copy of the General Theory and talk about how no, the government should not be cutting spending in a recession and cite page numbers.
These debates are a dog and pony show. You can’t get into detail with 1-2 minute questions, no follow up questions, and a moderator that whines every time you go over. I think that’s the one thing I learned in the past 8 years. Bush went on TV and said no nation building and compassionate conservatism and sound science. So what? Have to look beyond the debates. And if I did that and didn’t think Obama was better qualified I wouldn’t be posting here.
John S.
Sack up, man.
This is not the fucking Great Depression. There will not be bread lines. Yes, things will be tough for a lot of people for quite a while, but I really don’t think it will approach nearly the scale or magnitude of what went down in the early 1930s.
You think Obama is full of shit? Well, maybe he is a bit hesitant to acknowledge the full scope of the problem (for reasons well documented by Edmund Dantes). But if you read between the lines, you will see that Obama’s plans are very similar to what FDR did. Vast public works projects. Spearheading new technologies that we can profit from and export around the world. The creation of a new working class sector in "Green Jobs". And of course, shoring up the middle class.
If you are worried that we are in the midst of another Depression, then you should take some solace in the fact that the solutions being offered by one candidate are very similar to the solutions that were utilized in far more trying times and with great success.
Comrade Peter J
McCain should have gambled on talking straight about the economy instead of gambling on smearing Obama. Even if it wouldn’t have worked, it would have left him with some dignity.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
Both candidates realized that they were being asked the stupidest fucking questions by the worst fucking moderator in the history of the debates. Both went into spin/dodge mode and ran out the clock. Can’t say that I blame them. Brokaw was moronic.
To second Edmund’s great comment above, there are a whole list of things that Obama may believe but dare not say. Does Obama really believe that Iran is an "existential threat"? Probably not. No one with a brain believes that. But if he said it, he’d be finished.
Napoleon
It would be insane to cut the budget. Matt Y is correct in what he says. At this time if anything you spend more (which is why Bush was insane to cut taxes when he did, you save the spending for bad times).
I do have a couple of issues with some of his historical facts. First in talking about Scherer and the beltway consensous on cutting back he calls them "the new Hoovers". Honestly that is selling Hoover short. He actually at least started some of the progams and spending that FDR expanded, and it is a historical fact that FDR ran to Hoovers right on spending at that time and beat him. FDR promised to balance the budget as part of his program, and if you did the research I would guess you would find that at the time that was what the cool kids in Washington said you had to do to address the Great Depression.
shirt
Obama’s purpose is to win over the undecided middle; McPallin was to pander to his base. It isn’t important to count coup: for that, in fact, might allienate the very people you are trying to reach.
Obama was polite, assertive and non-threatening and was carefull not to interfere with the McCain death spiral.
What more do you want?
Phoenix Woman
The WaPo’s Ignatius had a similar complaint, John. So you’re not the only one to find fault with this avoidance. (Though as has already been said, nobody wants to be Fritz Mondale and say the inconvenient truth that sinks the campaign.)
Apparently the Obama campaign heard these concerns, because they issued this statement today:
cleek
the economy always sucks when a Democrat takes over from a Republican. and that’s why we can’t have nice things. the only party that ever gets to spend money is the GOP, because they take over after the Dems put the country back on track.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
But there will be ponies? I like your optimism and hope you’re right. But I’m afraid this thing is just getting started. The credit markets are frozen, largely because of the swaps market, and frozen credit is death.
I heard a great analogy yesterday. You’re in a room with 100 people, and 20 of those people have a deadly disease that is spread by touch. You have no idea who the 20 are, so your strategy is "touch no one". The banks have no idea who is toxic and who is not, so lending has frozen.
You can send your thanks to the geniuses who thought a $60T unregulated
financial marketcasino was a fine idea, and to Bush, Paulson, Cox, and Bernanke/Greenspan, who appear to have been completely asleep at the controls.Comrade Peter J
Everything’s bigger now.
Instead of the Dust Bowl, we got Global Warming.
I’m officially worried.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
Well, since the edit button is gone, and blockquotes are fucked, let me try this again:
But there will be ponies? I like your optimism and hope you’re right. But I’m afraid this thing is just getting started. The credit markets are frozen, largely because of the swaps market, and frozen credit is death.
I heard a great analogy yesterday. You’re in a room with 100 people, and 20 of those people have a deadly disease that is spread by touch. You have no idea who the 20 are, so your strategy is "touch no one". The banks have no idea who is toxic and who is not, so lending has frozen.
You can send your thanks to the geniuses who thought a $60T unregulated
financial marketcasino was a fine idea, and to Bush, Paulson, Cox, and Bernanke/Greenspan, who appear to have been completely asleep at the controls.Comrade Peter J
The end is near.
I’m beyond officially worried.
On second thought
51 voters shy, that’s a relief, the world will go on.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
What Edmund said above.
You fix the economy with the electorate you have, not the electorate you wish you had.
The Other Steve
It’s like a divorced couple with kids.
Daddy takes the kids on the weekend, goes to the ball park, the amusement park, let’s them stay up late watching movies.
Mommy says "Go to bed, you have school tomorrow." and "Did you do your homework?"
Mommy is no fun!
Comrade Incertus
@Soylent Green: Did you see The Daily Show last night? Stewart and Oliver skewered undecided voters–it was effing brilliant.
Progressive Libertarian
Presidents can ask for sacrifices from the American people. Presidential candidates not so much.
The question about sacrifice translates loosely into: "Senator Obama, would you care to write John McCain’s next attack ad for him? No? Senator McCain, same question."
The Grand Panjandrum
@Edmund Dantes: You left out the Q.E.D. at the end. Nice response.
jibeaux
You realize you just agreed with Scherer, then appeared to agree with Yglesias, who quoted the same thing and called it "ludicrous", right? Am I reading that right? In fairness, I think there’s truth to both: you have to spend to get out of a recession. And the recession is still going to suck and neither candidate wants to say that. Obama is not going to come out in a debate and say "go ahead and plant your victory gardens now, and the exact amount of your milk rations is TBD."
The Other Steve
Amy Sullivan has an interesting observation at swampland
Basically she notes, that McCain is helping Obama by pointing out his position on Pakistan. :-)
jcricket
Except for FDR, and look how poorly that worked out for the country and Democrats. Oh wait, it resulted in 50 years of peace, prosperity and income growth? And the Democrats controlled the House for 40 years? Shoot, there goes my thesis.
Seriously, Democrats need to stop being afraid of what the American public might think if they promote spending and taxing the rich – hint: they will like it if you just do it. That said, I think Obama’s being smart in not pushing some crazy big agenda just yet – he hasn’t won, and things don’t seem "that bad" to most. But in the next couple of years, Republicans will run farther to the right, the economy will get worse, and 2010 will probably be another chance for Democrats to seize the mantle of serious change – especially if we can go from the 56-58 seats we’ll have in the Senate to 60+ by then.
BTW – anyone suggesting a spending freeze or cutting spending is a fucking moron. You think the credit crisis is causing lockups in the economy? Just wait until the government stops adding fuel to the fire. And don’t even get me started about his health care plan.
I can’t shout this loudly enough – JOHN MCCAIN IS AN ECONOMIC WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION.
The government is not like a private corporation or you and me, where cutting spending in the hard times is smart. Economic stimulus from government spending nearly always helps the economy (hint: those stimulus checks Republicans are always promoting are simply one form of government spending), and moreover, people need social services more than ever during deep recessions. Because the economy is always cyclical, we should generally be running surpluses, and "setting it aside" so that when times get tough we don’t have to cut spending like some propose.
But of course, McCain’s going to free up lots of money by killing 0.6% of the budget (earmarks) and waste/fraud (~5% across everything, including defense). Oh, btw, those earmarks aren’t really fraud or bad – many are highway, bridge, school, etc. projects.
If you want to hasten the Depression, vote McCain.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
Brokaw: "Do you think the economy will get worse?"
Obama: "Why yes, Tom, yes I do. And now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to pack my bags, head back to Illinois, and look for a job."
Brokaw was a complete tool.
Arachnae
Uh… what everybody else said. First you win.
w vincentz
I hope that Barack brings Jimmy C into his administration as Sec of State. Jimmy’s peace initiatives have been proven.
Imagine if the "defense" (war) industry had huge funding cuts to their budgets when global peace breaks out.
The resources could be much better spent elsewhere.
I have approved this message.
John Cole
@jibeaux: I think Scherer is right in his diagnosis that neither is being straightforward about the extent of the crisis, but I think Yglesias is right about the spending.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
Best "shorter" in the history of shorters?
Lee
I wonder if anyone really knows how bad it is going to get. That might be the reason why everyone seems to be vague on the details.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
Let me say this again, for emphasis: a $60T unregulated swaps market, created out of thin air. Unregulated = unknown. "Vague" is an understatement.
w vincentz
The reality of the situation is that endless "wars" funded with credit and a Pentagon that enjoys a blank check can no longer be sustained.
It isn’t the "housing crisis" folks.
The only way the planet’s countries will recover is to become as cooperative towards bringing peaceful solutions to problems as they’ve been to assisting their finanicial institutions.
I also approve this message.
jcricket
BTW – I mentioned this once before, but at my gym there’s a guy who talks about how Carter got hammered for his whole turn down the thermostat and wear a sweater pramatism – and how 30 years later here we are again, ridiculing simple, common-sense ideas that would at least give us a buffer to handle these kinds of energy supply/price shocks.
But Republicans have been fucking up the debate so long we can’t even discuss it.
I hate them.
Atanarjuat
Nobama got schooled (and righteously so) by John McCain, and the gibbering wails of despair from the Ayers-enabling left are deafening in the extreme.
Remember this, you dishonorable cadre of America-hating traitors: Old Glory survived the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor and went on to massively triumph over its enemies. In this regard, so, too, will our great nation and all true American patriots inevitably triumph over underhanded smears vomited against the future President John McCain and Vice President Sarah Palin by the traitorous left (i.e., Democrats and most Balloon Juice commentators).
Country First.
w vincentz
@ JCricket,
I agree with you.
The proplem that Carter had with his presidency was that he was in power when the bills came due for the Vietnam debacle. Remember? That "war" the was funded with debt and paid back with inflated dollars?
The Carter Center has been on the lead on issues that of concern to the planet.
Endless "wars" are NOT sustainable. They drain the planet’s resouces, fracture the common good, and divert mutual objectives form the "family of man".
As Jimmy Carter quoted when he announced the Camp David accords, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God."
I also approve this message.
jibeaux
Then we are all agreed, in addition to being aware of all internet traditions.
Billy K(hrushchev)
Damn hippie communist.
Ben Richards
I think "Atanarjuat" is pig Latin for Gary Ruppert…
gbear
I’ll add my ‘what Dantes said’ to the chorus.
I also want to add that the best laugh I’ve gotten this morning it this last paragraph in Michael Gerson’s WaPo column this morning entitled "The Town Hall Debate: Two McCain Successes".
His preceding paragraphs were pure blather and totally wrong as usual, and most likely written before the town hall even started.
gbear edit: the second biggest laugh I got this morning was [email protected]
Vincent
Uh, where’s the despair? I don’t have any. You guys have any? I apologize if this is satire.
w vincentz
Hippie, yes.
Communist, no.
Pacifist, yes.
Damned, no!
Josh Huaco
Is October Schizophrenia Awareness Month?
gbear
But the ‘coalition of the willing’ that we were a part of in WW2 wasn’t fake like W’s.
SGEW
Pardon me, but it really deserves an entire repost:
Sniff. This is glorious. "gibbering wails of depair," "dishonorable cadre," "underhanded smears vomited against the future President . . . ."
Moar, please.
w vincentz
I hear ya, gBear.
Note how the ONLY war the flag wrappers envelope themselves in isn’t the one where there were dominos falling, nor WMD’s (that are in my garage next to the lawnmower), nor perceived mushroom clouds on the horizon. Their entire premise is about the big one, WWII.
Oh the glory!
Hey, didn’t we end up with facists in the White House afterall? Sure was a success.
At least we had drive-ins for a while, and very cool 57 Chevies.
Dennis - SGMM
Yes. and it took a Democratic president to do it – just like now.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
I’m so happy that I’ve been eating Hamburger Helper, macaroni and cheese, peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and Top Ramen for eons so that I won’t feel the pain when it becomes an absolute necessity.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Ummm, commentators?
We’re "commenters" not commentators. I don’t get paid to do this, fuckwad!
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Shhhh! That’s our secret weapon, we don’t want it to get out.
Phoenix Woman
SGEW: Yes. I can just hear the shrieks of "WO IST STEINER?!" in the background, can’t you?
TenguPhule
The Difference is that Daddy is using the bribes to play Hide the Sausage with the kiddies.
HyperIon
again i post what SGlover wrote on the WaPo site a couple of weeks ago:
i like his take because it gets beyond chastising the candidates to chastising the voters. we created this mess. we will have to clean it up. and it also undercuts the "wait until after the election to see the real Obama/McCain" argument.
TenguPhule
And had Republicans been in charge then, we’d all be speaking German now.
Jon H
"They are both full of shit. This economy is in a deepening recession, and the economy is going to get much worse.’
While true, the fact is that the situation will progress whatever impotent yammerings they might make. They aren’t in control. Even Bush, Paulson, and Bernanke aren’t in control. Whatever they say today will probably be null and void tomorrow, overtaken by events.
Worst-case scenarios:
1) Obama makes a good, practical suggestion, and Bush makes sure Paulson and Bernanke do the opposite, lest Obama be handed a ‘win’.
2) McCain makes some silly suggestion, and Bush makes Paulson and Bernanke enact it.
So it doesn’t really bother me that they are talking platitudes right now. I’m at least confident that Obama’s advisors are monitoring the situation so that, when January comes around, they’ll be able to propose sound strategies for handling the economy they’re handed.
John S.
He is the winner of my newly minted Paul Bunyan’s Axe Award for being a giant fucking tool ( I will whip up a clever graphic for Cole when I have some spare time).
Honestly, I’m not terribly optimistic — I just think that the circumstances are entirely different. I think the actual magnitude of this crisis (in dollars and affected industries) is greater than the Depression, but I also think we are in a completely different place as a nation. I think our middle class is FAR stronger than it was in 1929, and that makes a big difference.
We are much better equipped to handle these things than we were 80 years ago. I mean, look at the panic Orson Welles caused with War of the Worlds. That shit could never happen today because in a sense we are a more advanced people and our threshold for change and turmoil is much higher. I also think that we are going to maintain the Wile E. Coyote effect, whereby as a nation we will not fall after running off a cliff as long as we don’t look down.
And not to sound cliche, but the world of 2008 is simply too big to fail (for now). In a strange sort of way, I would argue that I am a pessimist — that is, I am not terribly worried about the state of things at the moment because I fully anticipate that the are going to get MUCH worse and I don’t feel that we have quite reached that threshold.
Grumpy Code Monkey
I think Mondale knew there was no way in hell he was going to beat Reagan, which freed him up to be honest about taxes. I think that also played a role in his picking Ferarro as his running mate; he had absolutely nothing to lose, so why not make a little history in the process?
Panurge
You can get people to accept less if you can show them that what they’ll still have will be cooler than what we have now. If we finally get to have DFH World or FutureWorld or whatever (or both!), that’ll be worth a lot of loss in bulk for a lot of people. (Besides, the McMansions and SUVs are all built now.)
Carter didn’t show us that; he showed us a permanent reduction in our standard of living, with no upside except for simple solvency (and a preserved environment). And then there was 1980 and the hostage crisis, and just enough of the American public decided they could call liberalism’s bluff–or decided that maybe Carter was wrong.
Carter couldn’t spin the situation into something positive. To be honest, I think that at least in this matter Obama will succeed where Carter failed.
HyperIon
i don’t want spin.
spin does NOT work.
we can clap hard but that STILL won’t keep Tinker Bell alive.
oh, noes, don’t say we have to pay the piper!
the upside: all those family conversations around the dinner table we’ll be having now that no one can afford to eat out.
update: i thought i had mastered the non-bold block quote. evidently not. will
work?
Panurge
OK, then, use some other word than "spin." (Which obviously does work, or we wouldn’t be here now.) Whatever–the point is that Carter’s skills at persuasion and framing the issue weren’t the best and in retrospect probably did more harm than good, allowing Reagan to seize the initiative in 1980. Paying the piper is fine, but once the piper is paid, then what do we have to look forward to? You’ve got to show some upside if you want people to listen to you.