I've posted these before. Interesting read:
What Happens Now?
After a campaign season that seems to have lasted for decades the election is over and essentially nothing
has changed. The President won a second term and pretty decisively. The House of Representatives is still
firmly in the hands of the GOP and the Senate is comfortably in the hands of the Democratic Party – just
exactly what existed before votes were tallied. In other words, if you liked the political situation we have had
for the last two years you will love the one we will have for the next two years.
Does any of this really matter as far as the economy is concerned? In some respects the elections will have
an impact but in many ways the vote only affects the big economic issues indirectly. For most of the last year
we have tirelessly tried to point out that Presidents may get much of the blame or credit for what is happening
in the economy but their power is very limited. Congress is charged with decisions on taxing and spending and
the President is mostly on the sidelines as a cheerleader and cajoler. They do have the power of leading the
majority party but in this case that gives Obama influence in the Senate but not in the House. The key issue in
the year to come may be the decisions of the Federal Reserve and that is out of the hands of the Chief
Executive as well.
The most efficient that government ever gets is when the President is of one party and Congress is in the
hands of the opposition. This forces both parties to the middle and makes the moderate wings more influential.
The current set up is perhaps the least efficient – as we have seen for the past two years. This Congress has
been the most inept in history if one measures that by the amount of legislation passed. Not since the “do
nothing†Congress of the late 1940s has there been less activity. It now appears that this very same set-up will
dominate for another two years at least and that is perhaps the biggest economic concern.
Analysis:
The number one issue now is the impending fiscal cliff and the latest election outcome could be
either good news or very bad news. Congress now has a little less than two months to figure out what to do
with the issue or they will essentially plunge the US back into a recession that could last for a solid year. The
betting is that they do something but the details are very murky.
On the positive side this is the Congress that will exists next year and that makes it far less of a lame duck
than had been expected. If the Senate had gone to the GOP there would have been a stronger temptation to
stall and force the next Congress to deal with the mess. Now the same people will be charge next year as are in
charge now and they have to find a solution or take the blame.
The negative side is that this is the same Congress that has been incapable of making a decision on this or
any other debt/deficit issue and there is arguably more acrimony and hostility than before. The Democrats are
riding a high and may not feel the need to compromise in the least. The GOP is feeling frustrated and may not
be willing to back off either. The few moderates left in Congress have almost no power and influence as most
of the new players are more ideologically motivated than the people they replaced.
The Pundits Speak – Why Such a Massive Defeat for the GOP?
In the end it wasn’t even close. As the day dawned the analysts were all breathlessly anticipating the closest race in years and many
expected that there would be no decision made until late today and maybe not until the end of the month. There was talk of having to
count provisional ballots and absentee ballots for weeks. There were likely to be recalls and races that were going to be dead heats down
to the last second. None of that happened. The President won a massive victory with 303 electoral votes and Romney limped in with just
over 200. Every single “battleground†state went for Obama – Ohio, Virginia, Wisconsin, Colorado and most likely Florida. The GOP
was dead in the water before 10:00pm.
The GOP needed to take at least eight of the “too close to call†states and they lost nearly all of them. Going into the election the key
states were thought to be Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Missouri, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana,
Nevada and Arizona. At the start of the year the GOP had a presumed advantage in nine of these. By the time the votes had been counted
the Republicans had won just two. Montana and North Dakota are still tallying but the Democrats are ahead in both of them. The only
victories for the GOP were in Nevada and Arizona.
What the heck happened? The pundits had been suggesting that a President presiding over high unemployment rates and a weak
economy would not be able to achieve a second term but that assessment was clearly incorrect.
Analysis:The post mortem will be taking place for weeks and months to come. Right out of the gate there are four explanations being
offered by those who assess such things. Bear in mind that these are some of the same people who predicted that the GOP would take
the Senate and the Presidency so one can take some of this with a grain of salt.
The first suggestion is that the Republicans are too divided to run an effective race. The primary battles were brutal and left Romney
battered before the real race even started. The messages that were used so effectively to isolate Romney and put him on the defensive
did not come from the Democrats. All the Obama campaign had to do was pick up the messages put forward by Newt Gingrich and Rick
Santorum and Ron Paul and continue the theme that Romney’s own party rivals used against him. None of those who ran against him
lifted a finger to support him once the primary campaign ended. Contrast that with the role that Hilary Clinton played in the 2008
primary after Obama beat her. In the Senate races the GOP allowed itself to be boxed in by supporting truly radical candidates like Todd
Akin and Richard Mourdock. Two states that were certain to be GOP victories were lost as these candidates were so extreme that most
Republicans could not stomach them. Romney has been a lifelong moderate but was forced to tilt very far right to keep the “baseâ€. By
the time he started to come back to the middle it was too late. The arguments here is that the “base†is too small to win elections and
too radical to allow independents to back the GOP.
The second suggestion is that Obama’s campaign targeted a very select population and went relentlessly after it. From the start of
the campaign the assumption was that half the population would vote against him and there was no point in reaching out to them at all.
The Republicans tried to woo the undecided and the wavering Democrats but the Obama campaign stuck to the core. It was a clear “us
vs. them†effort and one that rested almost entirely on the young, minorities and those who consider themselves poor. Of those who
asserted in polls that the US is unfair to the poor and working class Obama won over 95% of their votes. This explanation of the vote
asserts that Obama ran a “class warfare†campaign and counted on there being more people angry at the rich than there were people
supporting the US version of capitalism.
These may be the most emotionally charged of the assessments and come from people who are bitterly angry at the outcome. There
are some other less dramatic explanations as well. One holds that the race was close despite the heavy electoral tilt and in the end it
came down to the fact that there was some confidence that the economy had started to rebound. If one looks at the consumer
confidence levels in the last few weeks it is apparent that people are far more upbeat than they were even six months ago. Consumer
spending is up, business investment is up and there has been a relatively healthy stock market. In light of all this the mood of the voter
changed just enough to allow some to decide to give the current administration more time to turn the economy around. The exit polls
seemed to support this assessment as fewer people expressed concern about the economy than had been expected.
The last of the four under discussion right now asserts that other issues made the difference in the race and that it really didn’t come
down to “it’s the economy stupidâ€. This is an extension of the previous assessment in that voters who were less worried about the
economy now had an opportunity to assess the candidates on other issues. Three of these other issues that emerged in the exit polls
were abortion, foreign policy and “compassionâ€. The fact is that most of the population remains ambivalent about the issue of abortion
and polls have consistently stated that most Americans support the right to abortion in the case of rape, incest or the health of the
mother. The radical views of candidates like Akin and Mourdock cost them their bid for the Senate but may have cost Romney and the
GOP as well. The foreign policy issue was mostly Afghanistan and terrorism and the President has garnered support for his positions and
actions in this arena. The “compassion†issue was the hardest to pin down but the sense is that Obama would be more concerned than
Romney when it came to those in need. It appears that the federal reaction to the super storm provided
What Happens Now?
After a campaign season that seems to have lasted for decades the election is over and essentially nothing
has changed. The President won a second term and pretty decisively. The House of Representatives is still
firmly in the hands of the GOP and the Senate is comfortably in the hands of the Democratic Party – just
exactly what existed before votes were tallied. In other words, if you liked the political situation we have had
for the last two years you will love the one we will have for the next two years.
Does any of this really matter as far as the economy is concerned? In some respects the elections will have
an impact but in many ways the vote only affects the big economic issues indirectly. For most of the last year
we have tirelessly tried to point out that Presidents may get much of the blame or credit for what is happening
in the economy but their power is very limited. Congress is charged with decisions on taxing and spending and
the President is mostly on the sidelines as a cheerleader and cajoler. They do have the power of leading the
majority party but in this case that gives Obama influence in the Senate but not in the House. The key issue in
the year to come may be the decisions of the Federal Reserve and that is out of the hands of the Chief
Executive as well.
The most efficient that government ever gets is when the President is of one party and Congress is in the
hands of the opposition. This forces both parties to the middle and makes the moderate wings more influential.
The current set up is perhaps the least efficient – as we have seen for the past two years. This Congress has
been the most inept in history if one measures that by the amount of legislation passed. Not since the “do
nothing†Congress of the late 1940s has there been less activity. It now appears that this very same set-up will
dominate for another two years at least and that is perhaps the biggest economic concern.
Analysis:
The number one issue now is the impending fiscal cliff and the latest election outcome could be
either good news or very bad news. Congress now has a little less than two months to figure out what to do
with the issue or they will essentially plunge the US back into a recession that could last for a solid year. The
betting is that they do something but the details are very murky.
On the positive side this is the Congress that will exists next year and that makes it far less of a lame duck
than had been expected. If the Senate had gone to the GOP there would have been a stronger temptation to
stall and force the next Congress to deal with the mess. Now the same people will be charge next year as are in
charge now and they have to find a solution or take the blame.
The negative side is that this is the same Congress that has been incapable of making a decision on this or
any other debt/deficit issue and there is arguably more acrimony and hostility than before. The Democrats are
riding a high and may not feel the need to compromise in the least. The GOP is feeling frustrated and may not
be willing to back off either. The few moderates left in Congress have almost no power and influence as most
of the new players are more ideologically motivated than the people they replaced.
The Pundits Speak – Why Such a Massive Defeat for the GOP?
In the end it wasn’t even close. As the day dawned the analysts were all breathlessly anticipating the closest race in years and many
expected that there would be no decision made until late today and maybe not until the end of the month. There was talk of having to
count provisional ballots and absentee ballots for weeks. There were likely to be recalls and races that were going to be dead heats down
to the last second. None of that happened. The President won a massive victory with 303 electoral votes and Romney limped in with just
over 200. Every single “battleground†state went for Obama – Ohio, Virginia, Wisconsin, Colorado and most likely Florida. The GOP
was dead in the water before 10:00pm.
The GOP needed to take at least eight of the “too close to call†states and they lost nearly all of them. Going into the election the key
states were thought to be Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Missouri, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana,
Nevada and Arizona. At the start of the year the GOP had a presumed advantage in nine of these. By the time the votes had been counted
the Republicans had won just two. Montana and North Dakota are still tallying but the Democrats are ahead in both of them. The only
victories for the GOP were in Nevada and Arizona.
What the heck happened? The pundits had been suggesting that a President presiding over high unemployment rates and a weak
economy would not be able to achieve a second term but that assessment was clearly incorrect.
Analysis:The post mortem will be taking place for weeks and months to come. Right out of the gate there are four explanations being
offered by those who assess such things. Bear in mind that these are some of the same people who predicted that the GOP would take
the Senate and the Presidency so one can take some of this with a grain of salt.
The first suggestion is that the Republicans are too divided to run an effective race. The primary battles were brutal and left Romney
battered before the real race even started. The messages that were used so effectively to isolate Romney and put him on the defensive
did not come from the Democrats. All the Obama campaign had to do was pick up the messages put forward by Newt Gingrich and Rick
Santorum and Ron Paul and continue the theme that Romney’s own party rivals used against him. None of those who ran against him
lifted a finger to support him once the primary campaign ended. Contrast that with the role that Hilary Clinton played in the 2008
primary after Obama beat her. In the Senate races the GOP allowed itself to be boxed in by supporting truly radical candidates like Todd
Akin and Richard Mourdock. Two states that were certain to be GOP victories were lost as these candidates were so extreme that most
Republicans could not stomach them. Romney has been a lifelong moderate but was forced to tilt very far right to keep the “baseâ€. By
the time he started to come back to the middle it was too late. The arguments here is that the “base†is too small to win elections and
too radical to allow independents to back the GOP.
The second suggestion is that Obama’s campaign targeted a very select population and went relentlessly after it. From the start of
the campaign the assumption was that half the population would vote against him and there was no point in reaching out to them at all.
The Republicans tried to woo the undecided and the wavering Democrats but the Obama campaign stuck to the core. It was a clear “us
vs. them†effort and one that rested almost entirely on the young, minorities and those who consider themselves poor. Of those who
asserted in polls that the US is unfair to the poor and working class Obama won over 95% of their votes. This explanation of the vote
asserts that Obama ran a “class warfare†campaign and counted on there being more people angry at the rich than there were people
supporting the US version of capitalism.
These may be the most emotionally charged of the assessments and come from people who are bitterly angry at the outcome. There
are some other less dramatic explanations as well. One holds that the race was close despite the heavy electoral tilt and in the end it
came down to the fact that there was some confidence that the economy had started to rebound. If one looks at the consumer
confidence levels in the last few weeks it is apparent that people are far more upbeat than they were even six months ago. Consumer
spending is up, business investment is up and there has been a relatively healthy stock market. In light of all this the mood of the voter
changed just enough to allow some to decide to give the current administration more time to turn the economy around. The exit polls
seemed to support this assessment as fewer people expressed concern about the economy than had been expected.
The last of the four under discussion right now asserts that other issues made the difference in the race and that it really didn’t come
down to “it’s the economy stupidâ€. This is an extension of the previous assessment in that voters who were less worried about the
economy now had an opportunity to assess the candidates on other issues. Three of these other issues that emerged in the exit polls
were abortion, foreign policy and “compassionâ€. The fact is that most of the population remains ambivalent about the issue of abortion
and polls have consistently stated that most Americans support the right to abortion in the case of rape, incest or the health of the
mother. The radical views of candidates like Akin and Mourdock cost them their bid for the Senate but may have cost Romney and the
GOP as well. The foreign policy issue was mostly Afghanistan and terrorism and the President has garnered support for his positions and
actions in this arena. The “compassion†issue was the hardest to pin down but the sense is that Obama would be more concerned than
Romney when it came to those in need. It appears that the federal reaction to the super storm provided
bottom line is people care more about their party then progress and vote accordingly. Americans proved that by putting that bozo and his moron VP back in office.
) so, I don't really think that women have anything to fear when it comes to abortions, but apparently it worked. I also noticed in my area a lot of road paving going on in the last month, oh and free cell phones being handed out. Don't know what that was about, but I imagine it garnered votes. If I see that car again I'm gonna see if I can get one, even though I have one and don't need another one.
