death of the Democratic Party

Out of a Job
by Richard Fernandez
BELMONT CLUB BLOG

An Obama political aide argued that "people won't vote based on the unemployment rate, they're going to vote based on: 'How do I feel about my own situation? Do I believe the president makes decisions based on me and my family?'" David Plouffe was responding to news that not only was Recovery Summer not in the offing, but a Jobless Fall stood at the door.

Today's Labor Department report shows that many people are still struggling in the current economy: the unemployment rate rose to 9.2 percent in June, and the economy generated just 18,000 net new jobs last month — making it the slowest month for job creation in nine months.

…Since World War II, the only president to win re-election when the unemployment rate was over 7.2 percent was Ronald Reagan, and the rate was falling when Reagan won a second term in 1984.

While the economy will certainly be at the forefront of political debate in the next election, Plouffe said Wednesday that the presidential election will be more forward-looking.

"Their decision next year will be based upon two things," he said. "How do I feel about things right now and then, ultimately, campaigns are always much more about the future and who do I think has got the best idea, the best vision for where to take the country?"

Plouffe was putting the best face on a catastrophe. There was nothing to do but dodge and weave. The President indirectly blamed Congress' reluctance to increase the debt ceiling for the bad economic news. "President Obama pointed to the disappointing jobs report out Friday morning to make the case for quick action on a deal to increase the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, saying that 'the sooner that the markets know' a deal is done, the sooner they will have 'the certainty that they will need in order to make additional investments to grow and to hire.'"

But he must know in his heart of hearts that barring some unforeseen stroke of luck the "recovery" is finished. He will go into 2012 with economic calamity on his back. Liberal blogger Jane Hamsher warned that the President's party may cut spending and refuse to raise taxes in economic desperation, an act of betrayal which would result in the "death of the Democratic Party … as most of us have known it". She correctly understands that, like Lenin's New Economic Policy in 1921, there would be immense electoral pressure to beat an ideological retreat.
.................

An Obama political aide argued that "people won't vote based on the unemployment rate, they're going to vote based on: 'How do I feel about my own situation?

Personally have to disagree with this. I vote on the big picture and what I think is best for the whole country and a strong economy with maximum opportunity for all.

Obamacare would be great for me. Almost free for something I pay alot for now. So would generous SS and medicare benefits. But they are doomed for failure on the present course. I'd rather see them fixed even if I personally get less.

So I disagree, but maybe others do vote that way. Seems like that is the definition of selfish, per the Obama aide.

Think the MSM will repeat that idiot statement very often?

Since many people believe that we are going to see PERMANENT unemployment rates hovering near the 10% mark for the foreseeable future, no matter who is in office, I doubt this will be as big a deciding factor as some people imagine.

As for whether people vote based on whether they see the candidate as responsive to their personal situations, I do think it's a factor. But I'd hope that most informed voters would weigh personal concerns with societal ones when making a voting decision.

I think the Obama administration is going to face a lot more heat in the coming election for other issues, like caving to the Republicans in seeming to agree that the #1 issue is the deficit. And for failing to do anything about the rot in the financial sector that brought us down in 2008. That has been sort of swept under the rug with all the political screaming about healthcare and the deficit but I predict we will see another ugly shockwave to the economy as a result of the continuing systemic problems in the financial sector well before the election. And if that happens, it will cost Obama dearly.

It is not like the Republican party can run on their own record. What ever happened to their jobs, jobs, jobs mantra that they ran on last November? What legislation to increase employment have they since enacted?

They passed 18 bills in the last year.... It turns out 17 of them were to rename post offices and government buildings... Oh, yeah, and a few things about abortion, planned parenthood, and limiting as many women's rights as possible.

A good cleaning of ALL seats on both sides would be a start.
Neither "party" gives a damn about the citizens.

Obama took a bad situation and made it worse. The Democrats controlled both houses of congress and all they did was spend money quicker than a bunch of drunken sailors at a whore house. Democrats refuse to do the right thing and cut entitlement spending. Instead they will focus on cutting defense spending and taxing the rich, policies that will never succeed, but sound good to uneducated electorate who will buy this bulls**t. So we are all screwed. This country will need to learn lessons the hard way and that disgusts me. I just hope the so called moderates that voted for Obama learned a painful lesson and don't repeat it.

Entitlement spending is NOT part of the current crisis. It could be about 25 years from now...But it isn't NOW... The military, on the other hand, has cost us $3.7 TRILLION, so far, for two unnecessary wars.

Sounds good to the Kool-Aid drinkers... But the ones who spent the money like drunken sailors, were the Republicans under Bush when they DID control the Congress, with two unnecessary wars, unpaid for tax-cuts; unpaid for prescription drug benefits; subsidies to industries who should have paying for their own businesses and making better decisions about how to run their companies instead of going to the government tit for subsidies and handouts...

Insert standard "It's all the liberals fault" crap here: ______________________________

No, Bush was handed a SURPLUS, and BLEW it...

LadyJazzer wrote: Entitlement spending is NOT part of the current crisis. It could be about 25 years from now...But it isn't NOW... The military, on the other hand, has cost us $3.7 TRILLION, so far, for two unnecessary wars.

Sounds good to the Kool-Aid drinkers... But the ones who spent the money like drunken sailors, were the Republicans under Bush when they DID control the Congress, with two unnecessary wars, unpaid for tax-cuts; unpaid for prescription drug benefits; subsidies to industries who should have paying for their own businesses and making better decisions about how to run their companies instead of going to the government tit for subsidies and handouts...

Insert standard "It's all the liberals fault" crap here: ______________________________

No, Bush was handed a SURPLUS, and BLEW it...

Better check your numbers on entitlements again, due to the bad economy and so many people out of work, doomsday is sooner than you think, even the SS people admitted this.