Let's Talk Politics....
kapeluza
Posts: 3,434 Member
Who are you voting for come November?
Why ?
Let's debate.
Why ?
Let's debate.
0
Replies
-
I'd like some better options in candidates!0
-
Im not happy with my choices at all. I dont think Obama is cut out for the job and Rommney scares me. I dont know what im going to do yet.0
-
I'll vote for Obama. I think he's done a fine job given all he's had to deal with.0
-
Not being a citizen, I can't vote.
If I could, it would be for Obama. I'm not blind or dumb, I know he comes out of the corrupt Chicago political machine (which I'm somewhat involved in on the infrastructure side of things so I see what goes on) so I know he's more of a master of saying what people want to hear than of actually being a forthright guy. But as far as I see it, he's been getting things done - whether I agree with them or not - he's definitely a president that forges progess rather than sitting in the status quo and I like that because the country needs big big changes.
Romney doesn't bother me. If he wins I don't think much will change. Let's face it - democrat or republican, they're all really in the same party - the "big business first" party. Obama is just better at making it not look that way. Can you tell I'm a big fan of Noam Chomsky? Noam Chomsky for president please!
I'm happy beyond belief that Santorum fell out of the running. It means this election will be quite relaxing for me. If Santorum had gotten the candidacy I'd have been packing my bags and getting ready to make a run back to the UK.0 -
Obama. Like Brett said, I don't agree with everything he's done, but he's done a decent job. It seems like he had to "grow into" the job a bit, but I think all Presidents do.
Romney, for lack of a better term, is a Tool Bag. I have a feeling he'd be co-opted by the Paul Ryan "slash and burn" wing of the Republican Party.0 -
You're only voting for Obama because Rick Perry dropped out. Otherwise, I know he was your guy!I'll vote for Obama. I think he's done a fine job given all he's had to deal with.
0 -
While I fully admit to frequently being a single issue voter, I don't think there's a problem with that when the single issue affects my family pretty severely. Romney signed a pledge of support to a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage on the federal level. By contrast, Obama has done more than any other president in our history to help the lgbt community. In addition the types of lies Romney spouts kind of annoy me. They're not the run of the mill "I'm going to say one thing to get elected and then just flake on it" kind of things. He really just uses made up stories with zero grounding in reality. I think the bar for integrity is probably fairly low in politics, and I'm not happy about it, but he falls well below it in my opinion.
And it won't change my opinion (for the better), but I'm dying to know who his running mate will be.0 -
Romney, because at least there's a chance the federal gov't will shrink under him. With Obama, the debt is guaranteed to continue spiraling out of control.0
-
Living in Illinois, I had the opportunity to meet then-Senator Obama in August of 2006. He appeared at a county Democratic meeting in a nearby suburb. I had the morning off, so I decided "why not"--let's go see this guy. He appeared in a meeting room in the clubhouse of a park district golf course (albeit, a pretty fancy one).
I got there 40 min early because I thought the place would be crowded--even then Obama was starting to attract some big crowds. For whatever reason, this one stayed low key. I was easily able to walk in and get a seat.
Obama came in, gave a 15 min or so stump speech and then proceeded to take questions for the next 60-75 min. He spoke on every topic imaginable--health care, Iraq, foreign policy, the economy, social security, etc. He spoke thoughtfully and displayed an in-depth knowledge of each subject. (The slander of the "teleprompter president" is one of the more ludicrous delusions of Obama detractors). Obama thinks and talks in paragraphs, not sentences, so each answer took awhile. After awhile I started laughing to myself, thinking "this guy talks like me".
But I liked most of his ideas. In contrast to the current president at the time, he displayed total command of national and international issues, and he understood that they were complex and required nuanced, complex approaches. At the time he was not running for President, but, like a lot of people who heard him in those days, I came away thinking that he should. After the program I waited outside the building. His SUV pulled up to a side entrance, so I wandered over there. After a few minutes, he came out and I was able to shake his hand, introduce myself and just talk for a couple of minutes. Nothing really substantial since the aides were tapping their feet to get him into the car and off to the next appointment--but for me it was kind of cool. I did tell him I thought he should run--of course he just laughed.
After that, i made it a point to look up his speeches, position papers, etc,--a lot of that was available when he entered the race a few months later. During the campaign, I paid special attention to see if he could really handle the big national office. He passed all of my tests and I was glad to vote for him in 2008.
I will do so again in 2012. I supposed it says something about him that even many of his supporters say "well, I don't agree with everything he's done, but I still like him". There will be opportunities to go into more detail into my areas of disagreement, so I will defer that for now.
Overall, given the challenges he faced when coming into office, and the unprecedented obstructionism he has faced, I think he has done a remarkable job. It doesn't always seem that way, because it's been such trench warfare, but looking back over 3+ years, I think President Obama has served America well and more than deserves a second term. I think he combines a focus on positive ideals with a realistic, practical approach, and while that can drive many of his supporters (myself included) nuts sometimes, I prefer it to blind, ideologically driven approach (my opinion, of course) of the previous administration and current republican party. I think his intelligence and understanding of issues ranks as high as for any President in my lifetime. And I think his demeanor, self-confidence, moral character, and values not only stand in stark contrast to his upcoming opponent, but, again, stack up well with every President I have known (From Eisenhower on).
Obama's vision of America matches mine. I think his constituency LOOKS like modern America, again in stark contrast to his opponent and opposition party. I think his family embodies American values and the American dream and provides a powerful symbol to our ever more diverse culture and society.
I look forward to an enthusiastic and, hopefully, substantive debate. I'd like to think we can do better than the superficial trading of insults that passes for "debate" in most newspaper discussion groups.
BTW, if anyone gets a chance to read "Showdown" by David Corn, I would highly recommend it.
There are two other articles on the economy that I consider helpful as well:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/could-this-time-have-been-different/2011/08/25/gIQAiJo0VL_blog.html
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/05/joseph-stiglitz-the-price-on-inequality0 -
By contrast, Obama has done more than any other president in our history to help the lgbt community.
Other than the soundbite, three and a half years into his presidency, can you tell me what changes he has made or advancements in gay rights he has created?
If I were gay, I'd view his recent comments with a very skeptical eye. In my view, he hasn't actually done anything for the gay community, except give lip service, and even hat has been only very recently.
I will not be voting for Obama. All of you know that. But even if I was a single-issue voter, as you described, I'd have a tough time trusting his words when his actions have been so absent.
Please correct me if I've missed something, but really, what has Obama DONE for the gay community?0 -
Please correct me if I've missed something, but really, what has Obama DONE for the gay community?
For one, he made it so they can serve openly in the military.0 -
This is probably a waste of breath, but... Ezra Klein is a complete political hack. It's hard to take anyone seriously when they are so blindly ideological. You went on and on and on about how Obama is post-partisan (which is also crap, but I digress), and then reference Ezra Klein?!
It would be like me talking about how wonderful George Bush was and then using an article written by Bill Kristol to prove my point. Ideologues from both sides make me sick. Each side thinks *they* are the keepers of the "one truth"... it's ridiculous.
Ok sorry... this is probably another one of those times I should have kept my opinion to myself
0 -
Romney, because at least there's a chance the federal gov't will shrink under him. With Obama, the debt is guaranteed to continue spiraling out of control.
^^^^^^^^this^^^^^^^^ I want LESS gov't, not more...0 -
Romney, because at least there's a chance the federal gov't will shrink under him. With Obama, the debt is guaranteed to continue spiraling out of control.
Romney will spend less, but he'll also tax less, so the debt will go nowhere, unless Romney slashes and burns medicare, which probably won't happen.
As I recall, Obama was ready to agree to some unprecedented cuts (especially for a Democrat) with Bohener during the debt ceiling thing, but the Republicans would rather play politics when the issue of taxes comes up (not that the Dems don't do the same thing with entitlement spending).0 -
Frankly I don't believe Romney will spend less or reduce the size of government anyway. Name the last Republican president who did.0
-
As I recall, Obama was ready to agree to some unprecedented cuts (especially for a Democrat) with Bohener during the debt ceiling thing, but the Republicans would rather play politics when the issue of taxes comes up (not that the Dems don't do the same thing with entitlement spending).
I respectfully disagree with that version of events. While I agree that the GOP has been outright ridiculous in terms of raising taxes, Obama has never come close to offering the kinds of cuts necessary to get us back on track. Democrats and Republicans were fighting over billions of dollars when we should be talking about cutting trillions.
I would fire every sitting Senator and Rep and start from scratch. Enact term limits. Create a law that says if the House and Senate don't pass a budget, every single member gets recalled. Do you realize the Senate hasn't passed a budget since 2009?!
I hate politicians.0 -
Romney, because at least there's a chance the federal gov't will shrink under him. With Obama, the debt is guaranteed to continue spiraling out of control.
I wouldn't buy into that myth if I were you. the debt comes from the structure and foundation of our capitalism. No single leader is going to be able to put any kind of brakes on it. They just say they can because people fall for it. A reduction in our debt will require a massive overhaul in corporate structure and individual perspectives. A small shrinkage in the fed won't even make a dent.0 -
Other than the soundbite, three and a half years into his presidency, can you tell me what changes he has made or advancements in gay rights he has created?
FEDERAL LEGISLATION SIGNED INTO LAW
*Signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which expanded existing United States federal hate crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim’s actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability -- the first positive federal LGBT legislation in the nation's history
*Signed repeal of Don't Ask/Don't Tell
*Signed the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act
POLICIES CHANGED
*Reversed an inexcusable US position by signing the UN Declaration on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
*Extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees in 2009 and, further, in 2010
*Lifted the HIV Entry Ban effective January 2010
*Issued diplomatic passports, and provided other benefits, to the partners of same-sex foreign service employees
*Committed to ensuring that federal housing programs are open to all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity
*Conceived a National Resource Center for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Elders -- the nation's first ever -- funded by a three-year HHS grant to SAG
*Banned job discrimination based on gender identity throughout the Federal government (the nation's largest employer)
*Eliminated the discriminatory Census Bureau policy that kept our relationships from being counted, encouraging couples who consider themselves married to file that way, even if their state of residence does not yet permit legal marriage
*Instructed HHS to require any hospital receiving Medicare or Medicaid funds (virtually all hospitals) to allow LGBT visitation rights
*Required all grant applicants seeking HUD funding to comply with state and local anti-discrimination laws that protect LGBT individuals
*Adopted transgender recommendations on the issuance of gender-appropriate passports that will ease barriers to safe travel and that will provide government-issued ID that avoids involuntary "outing" in situations requiring ID, like hiring, where a gender-appropriate driver's license or birth certificate is not available
*Extended domestic violence protections to LGBT victims
*Extended the Family and Medical Leave Act to cover employees taking unpaid leave to care for the children of same-sex partners
*Issued guidance specifically to assist LGBT tenants denied housing on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity
*Issued a National HIV/AIDS Strategy praised as "long-overdue" by the Task Force, Lambda and others
*Issued guidance to 15,000 local departments of education and 5,000 colleges to support educators in combating bullying
*Cut back authority to discharge under Don't Ask/Don't Tell from hundreds of generals to just 6 civilian appointees, effectively ending discharges while working toward a permanent end to the policy.
*Led the fight that reversed a 2010 UN vote removing sexual orientation from the list of things people should not be killed for
*Launched the first-ever national study of discrimination against members of the LGBT community in the rental and sale of housing
*Determined that Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional, that discrimination against LGBT citizens should be subject to "heightened scrutiny" and that it will no longer defend this portion of the law in court.
*Vacated a court order that would have deported a gay American's Venezuelan partner
RESPECT & INCLUSION
*Endorsed the Baldwin-Lieberman bill, The Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009, to provide FULL partnership benefits to federal employees
*Released the first Presidential PRIDE proclamations since 2000
*Hosted the first LGBT Pride Month Celebration in White House history
*Awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Harvey Milk and Billie Jean King, joining past recipients such as Rosa Parks
*Appointed the first ever transgender DNC member
*Testified in favor of ENDA, the first time any official of any administration has testified in the Senate on ENDA
*Hired more openly LGBT officials (like these) in its first two years -- more than 150, including more than 20 "Senate-confirmables" -- than any previous administration hired in four years or eight
*Sworn in Ambassador David Huebner
*Changed the culture of government everywhere from – among others – HUD and HHS to the Export-Import Bank, the State Department, and the Department of Education
*Appointed Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, instead of conservatives who would have tilted the Court even further to the right and virtually doomed our rights for a generation. To wit (quoting McCain): "I've said a thousand times on this campaign trail, I've said as often as I can, that I want to find clones of Alito and Roberts. I worked as hard as anybody to get them confirmed. I look you in the eye and tell you I've said a thousand times that I wanted Alito and Roberts. I have told anybody who will listen. I flat-out tell you I will have people as close to Roberts and Alito ."
*Named open transgender appointees (the first President ever to do so)
*Emphasized LGBT inclusion in everything from the President’s historic NAACP address (“The pain of discrimination is still felt in America. By African American women paid less for doing the same work as colleagues of a different color and a different gender. By Latinos made to feel unwelcome in their own country. By Muslim Americans viewed with suspicion simply because they kneel down to pray to their God. By our gay brothers and sisters, still taunted, still attacked, still denied their rights.”) . . . to the first paragraph of his Family Day proclamation (“Whether children are raised by two parents, a single parent, grandparents, a same-sex couple, or a guardian, families encourage us to do our best and enable us to accomplish great things”) and his Mothers Day proclamation ("Nurturing families come in many forms, and children may be raised by two parents, a single mother, two mothers, a step-mom, a grandmother, or a guardian. Mother's Day gives us an opportunity to celebrate these extraordinary caretakers") . . . to creating the chance for an adorable 10-year-old at the White House Easter Egg roll to tell ABC World News how cool it is to have two mommies . . . to including the chair of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce along with the Secretary of the Treasury and the President of Goldman Sachs in the small audience for the President’s economic address at the New York Stock Exchange . . . to welcoming four gay couples to its first State Dinner
*Recommitted, in a televised address, to passing ENDA . . . repealing Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell . . . repealing the so-called Defense of Marriage Act
*Spoken out against discrimination at the National Prayer Breakfast ("We may disagree about gay marriage, but surely we can agree that it is unconscionable to target gays and lesbians for who they are -- whether it's here in the United States or, as Hillary mentioned, more extremely in odious laws that are being proposed most recently in Uganda.")
*Dispatched the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to call on the Senate to repeal Don't Ask / Don't Tell
*Launched a website to gather public comment on first-ever federal LGBT housing discrimination study
*Appointed long-time equality champion Chai Feldblum one of the four Commissioners of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
*Produced U.S. Census Bureau PSAs featuring gay, lesbian, and transgender spokespersons
*Appointed Retired Colonel Margarethe Cammermeyer, an early public champion of open service in the military, to the Defense Advisory
Committee on Women in the Services
*Publicly invited the shunned MIssissippi high school prom student to the White House
*Successfully fought for UN accreditation of IGLHRC (the International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission) -- against Republican attempts to block it
*Convened the first-ever anti-bullying summit to craft a national strategy to reduce bullying in schools
*Launched stopbullying.gov
*Awarded $13.3 million to the LA Gay & Lesbian Center to create a model program for LGBTQ youth in the foster care system
*Tweeted to 5.7 million BarackObama followers and nearly 2 million WhiteHouse followers the President's "It Gets Better" video
*Embraced that campaign with heartfelt messages from, as well, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of *Agriculture (aimed particularly at rural youth), the Secretaries of Education and Health & Human Services, the Secretary of Labor (in English and Spanish), the Director of OPM and LGBT members of the White House staff
*Issued a Department of Justice video urging kids to call a Justice Department toll-free number if their school is aware of bullying but taking no action
*Held the first ever White House conference on bullying prevention, led by the President and First Lady
*Hosted first-ever White House transgender policy meeting
http://www.equalitygiving.org/Accomplishments-by-the-Ad...0 -
As I recall, Obama was ready to agree to some unprecedented cuts (especially for a Democrat) with Bohener during the debt ceiling thing, but the Republicans would rather play politics when the issue of taxes comes up (not that the Dems don't do the same thing with entitlement spending).
I respectfully disagree with that version of events. While I agree that the GOP has been outright ridiculous in terms of raising taxes, Obama has never come close to offering the kinds of cuts necessary to get us back on track. Democrats and Republicans were fighting over billions of dollars when we should be talking about cutting trillions.
I would fire every sitting Senator and Rep and start from scratch. Enact term limits. Create a law that says if the House and Senate don't pass a budget, every single member gets recalled. Do you realize the Senate hasn't passed a budget since 2009?!
I hate politicians.
Sure, it wasn't enough to fix the problem, but it was a start. A lot better than the "kick the can down the road" B.S. they eventually came up with.
I would disagree that sending a bunch of inexperienced people to Washington would solve the problem. That would only likely intensify the hyperpartisanship that is a big part of the problem in the first place.0 -
Please correct me if I've missed something, but really, what has Obama DONE for the gay community?
Easily done. Ending DADT and having the DOJ stop defending the federal DOMA as it is unconstitutional (which I think it is). And this last one is really just a correlation but I'm willing to buy into it. Maryland is putting same-sex marriage on the ballot this year--not as a ban, but to make it legal. Before the presidents announcement that he was ultimately in favor of SSM, polling numbers put it fairly close to even. A few days later, polling numbers put the issue in favor of SSM. It could just be random, but I think by making his statement the president brought the topic into discussions, which invariably seems to favor proponents for marriage equality.
So perhaps you should speak so vehemently about topics you've actually researched.0 -
Frankly I don't believe Romney will spend less or reduce the size of government anyway. Name the last Republican president who did.
Yes well if Bill Clinton were running I'd vote for him.0 -
I would disagree that sending a bunch of inexperienced people to Washington would solve the problem. That would only likely intensify the hyperpartisanship that is a big part of the problem in the first place.
The Senate isn't even bothering to pass a budget anymore... I'm really not sure how things could get much worse.0 -
I would disagree that sending a bunch of inexperienced people to Washington would solve the problem. That would only likely intensify the hyperpartisanship that is a big part of the problem in the first place.
The Senate isn't even bothering to pass a budget anymore... I'm really not sure how things could get much worse.
I think some senators might argue that the proposed budgets are much worse than doing nothing. A difference in fiscal ideologies is just that.0 -
I would disagree that sending a bunch of inexperienced people to Washington would solve the problem. That would only likely intensify the hyperpartisanship that is a big part of the problem in the first place.
The Senate isn't even bothering to pass a budget anymore... I'm really not sure how things could get much worse.
I think some senators might argue that the proposed budgets are much worse than doing nothing. A difference in fiscal ideologies is just that.
I am quite certain, based on your posting history, if the Senate were currently GOP-controlled, your opinion on that subject would be significantly different.0 -
I would disagree that sending a bunch of inexperienced people to Washington would solve the problem. That would only likely intensify the hyperpartisanship that is a big part of the problem in the first place.
The Senate isn't even bothering to pass a budget anymore... I'm really not sure how things could get much worse.
I think some senators might argue that the proposed budgets are much worse than doing nothing. A difference in fiscal ideologies is just that.
I am quite certain, based on your posting history, if the Senate were currently GOP-controlled, your opinion on that subject would be significantly different.
Oh, no. I'd still see it as a difference of fiscal ideologies. Given the current state of the GOP, I tend to agree with you that I wouldn't agree with them. They weren't always like this, sadly. My point is just that you made a blanket statement of doing nothing is awful, when it's fairly clear that either side wants to block what it sees as "worse than nothing."0 -
Oh, no. I'd still see it as a difference of fiscal ideologies. Given the current state of the GOP, I tend to agree with you that I wouldn't agree with them. They weren't always like this, sadly. My point is just that you made a blanket statement of doing nothing is awful, when it's fairly clear that either side wants to block what it sees as "worse than nothing."
The Economist agrees with you:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/02/parliamentary-procedure0 -
I'm starting to be convinced by the idea, held by quite a few for awhile now, that politicians have no interest in discussing anything with each other and prefer to speak *at* one another. I'm also starting to be convinced that the reason for this is because the discussion has already happened, behind closed doors with the people funding their campaigns.
Does Obama spend a lot of time fund raising? Yup. They all do. They all think they have to. Money buys votes.0 -
Frankly I don't believe Romney will spend less or reduce the size of government anyway. Name the last Republican president who did.
I agree with this, and democratic presidents don't cut back either. Which is why I won't vote for either. In my opinion a vote for Obama IS a vote for Romney and vice versa.
Seriously, how are things ever going to change if we keep voting for the same kind of presidents, even with different parties? I supposed everyone is ok with just letting things continue on until our country is completely destroyed?
I'll be voting for Paul, or Gary Johnson. I will write in if I must but my vote will not go to Obama or Romney. :sick:0 -
Frankly I don't believe Romney will spend less or reduce the size of government anyway. Name the last Republican president who did.
I agree with this, and democratic presidents don't cut back either. Which is why I won't vote for either. In my opinion a vote for Obama IS a vote for Romney and vice versa.
Seriously, how are things ever going to change if we keep voting for the same kind of presidents, even with different parties? I supposed everyone is ok with just letting things continue on until our country is completely destroyed?
I'll be voting for Paul, or Gary Johnson. I will write in if I must but my vote will not go to Obama or Romney. :sick:
^^^same here. My vote stays with R. Paul. I may not agree with all he says, but then I never agree 100% with anyone. His values on personal freedom and responsibility more closely align with my own. That, and agree with him or not, he is probably the most honest person I've seen in Washington - and that I can respect.
Listening to hardcore Democrats and Republican both, snipe at each other and ridicule each other's views accomplishs nothing. I long for a Congress filled with Independents who hold no ideology or values with either side. Then maybe we could actually have some adults, with real adult conversations, to determine what is truely in the best interests of ALL Americans, and who actually understand what is a "State's right" and leave their noses out of it. <sigh> Politics causes me stress.
In anycase, whomever wins the Presidency, I sincerely hope that whichever party they belong to does not gain a Supermajority in Congress. That just never seems to work out in the American public's favor.0 -
This is probably a waste of breath, but... Ezra Klein is a complete political hack. It's hard to take anyone seriously when they are so blindly ideological. You went on and on and on about how Obama is post-partisan (which is also crap, but I digress), and then reference Ezra Klein?!
It would be like me talking about how wonderful George Bush was and then using an article written by Bill Kristol to prove my point. Ideologues from both sides make me sick. Each side thinks *they* are the keepers of the "one truth"... it's ridiculous.
Ok sorry... this is probably another one of those times I should have kept my opinion to myself
Well, you get the award for the first ad hominem attack.
The article reviews the economic conditions faced by the Obama administration when they took office, the initial steps they took to attack the problem, and asked whether a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the economic crisis led to missteps in their approach.
There were two things: one was that the state of the economy was much worse than anyone realized.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis originally projected that the economy shrank by 3.8% for Q4 of 2008. Months later, that figure was revised to 6.2%. It wasn't until 2011 that it was determined that the economy had actually shrank by 8.9%--one of the worst quarters in American history.
So not only was the decline over twice as much as originally thought, the nature of the recession was different as well. Klein cites a study by Carmen Reinhoff and Ken Rogart about the nature of financial crises vs other types of recessions.
From the article:The basic thesis of “This Time Is Different” is that financial crises are not like normal recessions. Typically, a recession results from high interest rates or fluctuations in the business cycle, and it corrects itself relatively quickly: Either the Federal Reserve lowers rates, or consumers get back to spending, or both.
But financial crises tend to include a substantial amount of private debt. When the market turns, this “overhang” of debt acts as a boot on the throat of the recovery. People don’t take advantage of low interest rates to buy a new house because their first order of business is paying down credit cards and keeping up on the mortgage.
In subsequent research with her husband, Vincent Reinhart, Carmen Reinhart looked at the recoveries following 15 post-World War II financial crises. The results were ugly. Forget the catch-up growth of 4 or 5 percent that so many anticipated. Average growth rates were a full percentage point lower in the decade after the crisis than in the one before.
Perhaps as a result, in 10 of the 15 crises studied, unemployment simply never — and the Reinharts don’t mean “never in the years we studied,” they mean never ever — returned to its pre-crisis lows. In 90 percent of the cases in which housing-price data were available, prices were lower 10 years after the crash than they were the year before it.
There is no doubt that the post-crisis trajectory looks more like the slog Reinhart and Rogoff described than the relatively rapid rebound predicted by the administration and many forecasters. Yet even among economists who admire Reinhart and Rogoff’s work, there is skepticism.
One source comes in how Reinhart and Rogoff find the economic phenomena they’re trying to study. “There’s an identification problem,” Stiglitz says. “When you have underlying problems that are deep, they will cause a financial crisis, and the crisis itself is a symptom of underlying problems.”
Another is in their fatalism. “I don’t buy their critique in the sense that this was an inevitability,” says Dean Baker, director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research and one of the economists who spotted the housing crisis early.
The Obama administration didn’t buy the idea of inevitability, either. The team crafted a multi-pronged approach of stimulus spending, programs to address the housing market, and policy coordinated with an activist Federal Reserve. It firmly believed that it was better to do too much than too little. Its credo was well expressed by Romer at that December meeting, when she told the president, “We have to hit this with everything we’ve got.” But in reality, the administration could only hit it with everything it could persuade Congress to give. And that wasn’t enough.
Klein's article goes on to describe actions taken by the Obama administration, the steps, missteps, etc. It also describes the political climate and the challenges involved.
I didn't originally mean to quote so much from the article, but I felt it was necessary to dispute the reflexive charge of "hackery" thrown out without any evidence.
I found it both analytical and I felt it was even-handed. Obviously my opinion is subjective and it's fair to be skeptical of it. I provide the quote so everyone can judge for themselves the quality of the writing and perhaps be tempted to read the whole thing.
I think it 's important to bring some substance because the economy is probably going to be the key issue in the campaign and there will be a lot of "the stimulus failed" and "Obama's reckless spending". I consider both of these to be specious arguments, but if we are going to have them, they should at least be put in context.0
