I have not seen my income keep up with inflation at all nor have most of the people I know. And inflation has not come down, it has slowed down. Every time I go to the grocery store I cringe at prices. I understand it is more complicated than “it’s Biden’s fault”.
And I am a Democrat and definite Biden voter as are most of the people I know. I can easily see how independents and other D voters would be disturbed by this and less inclined to vote for Biden.
“Was an issue” is not an accurate view. Americans haven’t faced inflation like this since the awful 1970s and they aren’t used to it. The prices that went up in the last three years haven’t magically gone down again, they stayed up and are still rising. People look at the cost of a loaf of bread or a gallon of milk (the usual suspects) and they can’t believe how much it has gone up in just a very few years. This is a problem, it may not be Biden’s doing, but inflation is usually seen as a reflection on the President first.
As to the cause of inflation, do you really think that the government can give away hundreds of billions of dollars to the citizens (sorely needed in many or most cases, but that’s not the point) without the cost of goods rising because of it? If people want to be objective about inflation, they have to realize that these necessary measures don’t come without a price. But a lot of people can’t put together “free money” with the results of increased buying power that happens because everyone has “free money.”
Yes, but, that was, in large part, referring to the “personal pocketbook” sorts of economic things, which individual people/voters experience. The U.S. economy had been in a recession in the early '90s (in the second half of GHW Bush’s presidency), inflation was up, unemployment was up (7.8% in June of 1992), and consumers were feeling pessimistic about the economy.
That famous quote is from James Carville, one of Clinton’s campaign strategists, in the 1992 election. People weren’t happy about the economy, and Carville was stressing that it needed to be a key message for Clinton (along with “Change vs. more of the same” and “Don’t forget about healthcare”).
This +1. People base their opinion of the economy on going to the store.
How does the unemployment rate affect me if I already have a job that I’m staying in? How does the stock market affect me when I don’t look at my Roth/401K statement, or more likely in America I don’t have a retirement plan? Housing prices going up? Great for the homeowner that see this once a year when the assessor’s statement comes; horrible for a non-homeowner seeing the hope of home ownership slipping away. And so on. Real income growth? Are you sure that’s not skewed by new hires because most people I know are not getting COLAs that keep place with inflation - that being those that even get a COLA.
The fact is that most of the stats you point out do not impact the Average American at all and even if they do, they may not be aware of it on a regular basis.
It depends on the situation you’re in economically prior to the government spending. So, the pandemic knocked a humongous hole in the economy, which the stimulus helped fill. This isn’t inherently inflationary, as most economists will tell you, as it’s just supporting basic demand and trying to limit the damage from the pandemic recession.
In this particular case, the Fed raised rates, which was supposed to induce a slowdown in spending & hiring (i.e., a mini-recession). But inflation came down with none of that. The mechanism to lower inflation didn’t work like it was supposed to. This is a very strongly indicative that the inflation was mostly from supply-shocks. The one thing that very much did occur is that supply chains un-kinked themselves, removing the supply shock and lowering inflation. The rest of the world also experienced inflation, including countries with very little stimulus compared to the US.
Sure, I remember those days well, including everything you mentioned. However, I would venture to say that the electorate isn’t as motivated today by economics in POTUS elections as they were in the 1990’s. I think there’s been a change, especially among the average Republican voter.
There’s a thread running right now here at the
Dope called “is Mcdonald’s now a luxury meal?”
If we Dopers have to discuss this, then the economy is not good–for many, many Americans.
If you hesitate to pay $12 for lunch, you don’t care about the dow jones index.
Part of it is that people are stupid and part is that for the past generation, presidents have crowed about economies that they have very little control of and their opposition has railed about economies that they could not have done better at. Presidents do not create jobs, presidents do not control inflation, and presidents do not control the stock market.
People think of the presidency as some kind of paternal protector to keep all the ills of the world at bay. War in Gaza? Biden didn’t stop it. War in Ukraine? Biden didn’t stop it. Inflation? Gee, isn’t there a button on the Resolute Desk labeled No Inflation and the damned fool Biden forgot to press it? People are fools. If a bill passed to increase road funding on Monday, they expect all the potholes to be gone on Tuesday morning. Government exists only as a scapegoat for these idiots.
Sure, in any given economy, there will always be some people who are doing worse. And some people who are doing better. But in a good economy, like we have now, there will be more people doing better than doing worse. Even if Biden loses voters in the category of people who are doing worse, he should be gaining more than that in the category of people who are doing better.
It’s not all stupid, it’s also people who are unengaged with politics. For example, where should Democrats crow about Biden’s economic strategies? Newspapers are failing.
That’s a joke, right?
If newspapers are “failing” because people would rather get their news from a podcast or whatever, then Democrats should criw avour their achievements in podcasts.
It’s not like humans no longer communicate now that newspapers are declining.
My point was that Biden’s appearance on Howard Stern was a good idea, but people who listen to podcasts that host someone who will talk up his economic policies are probably ones that Democrats will already be listening to now.
How does he break through to the people who don’t know what Trump’s like or what Biden’s done?
Prop up the rock they have been living under?
I remain unconvinced that after a near decade of Trump these mythical “undecided voters” actually exist.
Well, Trump recently went to a rally in NJ and talked for a couple hours. Did Fox cover the whole thing, or just clips? And again, a lot of people just aren’t interested in politics and so don’t have enough info to make a choice. I know, I don’t get it either.
Did you watch the whole thing, or just clips? I presume you consider yourself someone who “knows what Trump is like” without having watched the whole thing?
Yes, but I don’t think I’m an average voter, and certainly not undecided. So why can’t people make a choice?
I’m not the one claiming that there is a large contingent of undecided voters.
I’ll fully admit it’s more of a hope than anything I have as a solid number. There must be some out there who can be persuaded to join Biden. At least I hope so.
Yup, others like Democrats. Which is why the economy is doing better for most people, because we have a president who wants other people to do well. I mean, you could say that you oppose Democrats because, even though they’re making things better for most people, there are still some nonzero number of people who are worse off… but that’s not really a logical position.
I think he has in fact been saying that since he got in office. Have you not seen any of his speeches?