The natural impulse of the country is to change things when they don’t like how things are going. Since 2001, politics has been like a loose ball on a football field that both teams chase around and no one can seem to pick the darn thing up and run with it.
If Republicans are to have a chance in 2016, they HAVE to govern well. I read a lot of Republican blogs and watch a lot of Republican talk shows though, and I think a big change from the Bush years is that they do seem to be understanding that the Republicans must govern more effectively than the Democrats. Smaller government is supposed to be more efficient government, so Republicans need to have the government do a good job just as much as Democrats do.
I have always thought that things will have to get worse for the middle class before they get better, and this election will accelerate that worsening, depending largely on how much the Republicans are able to get done with control of both houses of Congress. The more the Republicans can accomplish, the worse things will get. I suspect they will be able to get a surprising amount done, especially on economic issues.
And that’s the element of this last election that I totally just don’t get. How are things not getting better? Gas is cheaper, unemployment is down, the economy’s improving… the only bad bits seem to be happening outside the US, where it can easily be argued that we don’t have much influence (or, at least, not enough). Oh, and the gridlock in Congress, but that’s clearly being instigated by the Republicans.
So what’s so bad? I admit I may be spoiled in that my life’s been pretty good the past 8 years (despite my recent layoff), but I’m just not seeing anything other than some sort of vague “things should be better, dammit” vibe.
Things are getting better, you’re absolutely right. But the government has been performing poorly and in an unusual development, Americans are really noticing even as the economy improves. Americans are angry at our broken government and blame both parties. But as is usually the case, they blame the party in the White House more.
One of these parties needs to start governing competently and stop playing corrupt games. We are in the internet age now, a lot of the BS politicians used to be able to get away with, they can’t now. It’s time for real change and whichever party figures out how to accomplish that, the 50-50 nature of our country since 2000 will be broken and one party will attain a superior position.
The Democrats were unable (and seemingly unwilling to even try) to make the case, which I think would have been pretty easy, that Obama has made America stronger and more prosperous.
I think that would be a very difficult case to make. America has made itself stronger and more prosperous. Plus Obama has failed to take credit for that because he bitches too much. When you’re bitching all the time about Republicans obstructing your agenda it’s hard to argue that your agenda is making the country better. Clinton just handled this issue a lot better than Obama has. You attack the Republicans on specifics, but not in general. Obama has attacked them in general for holding up his agenda, and so Americans see just a broken government that has had nothing to do with our recovery and may even have held it back.
Lightnin’: You’re forgetting that ebola is ravaging the US. And that illegal immigrants are taking all of our jobs, while terrorists are going to launch major attacks in places like Kansas. Plus, you seem to be ignoring the fact that Obama’s oppressive regulations are crushing what jobs aren’t taken by illegal immigrants because he wants the US to be a third world country. Plus, the gays. Need I say more?
Not really, no. Very early on, I said I hoped Romney would have a shot, but that was a hope and not a prediction. I was calling the election for Obama well before election day.
Public perception can be changed. The Democrats didn’t even seem to try and change public perception as a strategy. Every candidate had their own message, and little to none of it was “months and months of growth, lower and lower unemployment, fewer and fewer uninsured, fewer and fewer troops dying overseas, etc.”.
Not the latter one. You do not want to draw attention to what’s going on the Middle East. Although interestingly, Democrats won among voters who support the campaign against ISIS.
I disagree – I think that might be the most important one. Bush threw away American lives for nothing (due to incompetence, not malice) – that’s about the worst thing any President can possibly do without deliberate malice. Obama successfully resisted calls from his political opponents that would have resulted in more dead American troops.
I think it’s fine to call attention to what’s not going on – American troops aren’t dying there.
I just don’t think that withdrawal from Iraq has proven to be a good policy. The economy is better, that’s what Democrats could have run on, but again, years of bitching that you can’t get your agenda passed muddles that message.
Americans had a dim view of the country despite improving conditions because politicans from both sides say that things are crappy because of the other side. What Obama should have been doing ever since 2012 is saying, “It’s morning in America again, don’t listen to those Republican naysayers. We’re on the right track.” Instead, he agrees with the Republicans that things aren’t working as they should, he just wants to make it their fault. Which he can’t do, because the President always gets the credit or blame.
Well things have been going well economically for the one percent, but wages remain stagnant and although the official unemployment rate has dropped, I have to wonder how much of that is discouraged workers who are no longer on the rolls.
For Iraq, perhaps not. But it’s easy to argue that it has been much better for America, and especially American troops, who are no longer dying in Iraq.