Always Look On The Bright Side

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Because Krugman is an economist rather than a politician it is always chic to dismiss some hard truths by saying that Krugman doesn't understand politics. I doubt he understands politics as well as, say, Bill Clinton but he has enough of a basic grasp of the thing that his political proposals are usually legitimately debatable. (That is a lot better than the average politicians grasp of economics.)

The proposal here is debatable. People do like positivity. They always turn down those focus group dials when someone tries to lay blame.

But it does not follow that being "Reaganesque" works when you're really up against the wall. If people didn't vote based on negative ads we wouldn't see so many negative ads. The RW continues to blame everything in the world on Jimmy Carter and seems to do okay with it. Etc.

So in considering the merits of pretending the economy is okay versus admitting the truth and laying blame for it I might side with the WH that happy talk is more popular than blame.

Except for one thing... the WH has been happy-taking the economic crisis from day one and Republicans have resurged and people hold Obama as accountable for our current mess as they do Bush. So maybe try shock therapy for a while. (???)

(I enjoy Obama's scathing driving metaphors about the Republicans but they are usually offered only to red-meat Dem constituencies and are often accompanied by Obama buying into Republican frames while criticizing Republican politicians.)

________________________

August 3, 2010, 8:24 am
Always Look On The Bright Side
Paul Krugman

I sort of knew this, but I’m still somewhat amazed to see Tim Geithner’s happy talk in today’s Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/03/opinion/03geithner.html?_r=1&hp

Here’s the reality: the stimulus was too small; we’re not seeing growth at a pace that will bring unemployment down rapidly, if at all; we clearly should be doing more; but obstructionism from Republicans is preventing action. And the administration knows all this perfectly well.

So one way to play this politically would be to tell the truth, and try to place the onus on Republicans, accusing them of perpetuating high unemployment.

Instead, however, the administration has decided to engage in happy talk, saying that it’s all good.

Do they really think this will work? I mean, I live in fairly rarefied circles (that’s not a boast, it’s an admission of inadequacy), and even so I know a number of people whose lives have become a living hell: men in their late 50s who fear they’ll never work again, small business owners who have lost everything. Does the administration really believe that it can convince these people that it’s all on the mend?

I just don’t get it.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/03/always-look-on-the-bright-side/

[JuniperLea]

1. It's too much! It's not enough!

He's spent too much money! He's not spent enough!

He's doing too much! He's not doing enough!

He's too centrist! He's too librul!

[Oregone]

3. What an absolutely inadequate reply

I'm embarrassed for this site

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. -

[JuniperLea]

8. WTF?

Seriously.

[Oregone]

9. Yargle Bargle

[dogday]

4. Well here is one thing he is doing..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8866781&mesg_id=8866781

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Economists said the stim was too small to begin with

from word go.

[Electric Monk]

16. When life seems jolly rotten, there's something you've forgotten, and that's

to laugh smile and and dance and sing.



Just purse your lips and whistle. That's the thing.

[Winterblues]

23. Now THAT is Change you can believe in

I sometimes get angry at being played for such a chump...

[derby378]

2. Here we go...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1loyjm4SOa0

[DailyGrind51]

7. There is the notion that economics is a "soft" science and that the prevailing mood can become

self-fulfilling prophecy.

[DFLforever]

10. I admire Paul Krugman immensely but I think it's time

he concedes this administration understands American politics better than he.

What I don't get is why he keeps banging his head against this same wall.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

11. I don't know that is true

It would be one thing to say he should concede that he has an imperfect understanding of American politics, but using this administration as an example of knowing something about politics is kind of weird.

I admire a lot of the administration's virtues (many of which are politically unpopular virtues) but they are notably politically inept.

[DFLforever]

15. What ' notable' political ineptness are you referring to?

Their ability to get elected in the first place or their ability to pass legislation?
or something else political I haven't considered.

[MadHound]

20. Oh, off the top of my head, failing to get the public option

When the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted it.

Another good example, keeping on pissing off teachers in this country, who were a solid part of his base in '08.

Want me to continue?

[Oregone]

12. "What I don't get is why he keeps banging his head against this same wall."

Because he feels that without adequate stimulus, many Americans will feel unnecessary, prolonged pain. Is that worth fighting against?


"I think it's time he concedes this administration understands American politics better than he"

Perhaps, but the crux of the matter at hand is the approach. Should the Obama administration portray happy thoughts (and do nothing), or instead attempt to pin the failure to pass additional stimulus on the Republicans (perhaps either forcing its passage, or forcing out Republicans)? Well, no matter how much one understands politics, they could do either with a unique approach by framing the narrative properly. If Obama understand US politics immensely, he could probably pull of what Krugman is suggesting in his own unique way, tailored perfectly for the political environment. Instead, he is attempting the alternative--perhaps more difficult--approach: convincing people of what is not completely true. While both approaches takes political astuteness, one may yield more effective results than the other.

So while one may not necessarily understand politics to the same degree, its possible to have enough understanding of policy to know what is the more fruitful approach. It is up to those who actually understand politics to realize the most viable option in some finite span of time.

[texastoast]

13. Capitalize the successes and socialize the failures

There should never have been any fucking bailouts of corporations that made extremely poor business decisions. That should have fallen on their stockholders. We just postponed the inevitable.

There's no more money. There hasn't been for a long time.

It came about by this country thinking that trickle down, deregulated economics would work. We are fucked and we might as well start digging out now. And it ain't going to be pretty.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

14. Postponing the inevitable is the soul of governance

Responsible governance is an endless process, not an apocalyptic stab at perfection.

That's what doctors do -- postpone the inevitable.

The existence of the nation of Holland is all about postponing the inevitable. They will be under water someday but keeping the water out today has benefits.

[texastoast]

18. So acquiesce to the continuance of folly?

I advocate electing visionaries. Just because we've been extremely stupid doesn't mean we have to make the choice to continue to be so. After all, your children will ask you about it and what can you say: "I fought the fight to not dump decades of stupidity on your backs" or "I worked hard to postpone the inevitable and you are going to have to clean it up. Sorry."

[BrklynLiberal]

17. Krugman may not know politics, but he knows economics.

There may be times when economics overrules politics.

[kenny blankenship]

19. Well at the risk of repeating myself, they should have told the truth right from the start

about everything.

About the economy and the multitrillion dollar fraud scheme perpetrated by the banks, the rating agencies, the Wall St. law firms...

About the war- the lies and futility and profiteering...

About the environment- the need to plan our economy, as if on a wartime basis, to get away from fossil fuels...

About the incompatibility of private for profit insurance with anything worthy of being called Health Care Reform. You cannot keep these monstrous companies in business and accomplish the goals of universal health care, serving the public interest...

About the torture and Constitution shredding warrantless surveillance and the day by day growth of new invasive police measures and how the erosion of individual liberties leads to the erosion of the individual...

All of these problems could have been pinned on Bush and the Republican's ideology of greed and aggression. And it was absolutely necessary that they should have been pinned on the guilty to make a new start. It was necessary for meaningful progress to be made on these fronts and it also was necessary politically to keep Democrats on the offensive and Republicans on the defensive. But instead, President Genius thought he would "reach out".

Now if Obama and co. start to assign blame where it is due they will be accused of scapegoating the Republicans for their own failure. And no one will believe them.

[Steely_Dan]

21. Well Written....n/t

[LWolf]

22. Your thread title, and your question, starts this up in my head:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlBiLNN1NhQ


While I DO think that finding the positive to focus on helps move things forward, I DON'T think that pretending that a negative is positive does the same thing. It's just dishonest.