My favorite analyst sees the White House as being caught between a rock and a hard place:
The Obama administration seems curiously obsessed with plans that are designed to burden investors, employers, and the very sectors of the economy that are hurting the most. It is hard to discern how a bevy of tax increases, cap and trade regulation, nationalized health care, an ongoing co-dependent relationship with two failing car companies, and “cram down” legislation designed to give bankruptcy courts power to rewrite mortgages will instill confidence or restore economic activity. Larry Kudlow calls this collectively a declaration of “war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
In short, the deepening recession throws a big wrench into Obama’s plans to skip the task of reviving the economy and slide right into enacting the agenda of ultra-liberalism. If revenues decline, businesses continue to fail, and the investor class continues to abandon the U.S. economy it makes his plans to further encumber “the rich” and private enterprise that much more problematic. Even the New York Times notes that there is an increasingly apparent disconnect between, on one hand, the dismal economic outlook and, on the other, the rosy scenarios and big government expansion envisioned by the Obama team.
As a political matter, the worsening economic outlook also puts at risk Democrats’ electoral prospects. In the race to replace Kirsten Gillibrand in New York’s 20th Congressional district, Republican Jim Tedisco is running on a tax cutting, populist message and attacking his Democratic opponent as a financial swindler and proponent of the failed Obama economic program. A win by Tedisco, who leads by double digits, would be the first sign that voters aren’t enamored of the Obama high tax, big government, bailout mania approach to the economy. Democrats will also have to run gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey this year in the face of cratering economic news, rising unemployment, and enormous budgetary shortfalls run up under Democratic governors. Once again, the popularity of Obama’s policies, as opposed to his personal appeal, will face a test at the polls.
But the real action will be in 2010 when the Obama economy will be at issue. That’s the target for conservative activists (including those who assembled at CPAC last week) and the GOP’s high profile leaders. (Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney have already declared themselves committed to doing whatever it takes to unseat incumbent Democrats.) While conservatives are incensed over the president’s big government agenda, all voters will have something to complain about if their 401(k)s continue to slide, unemployment remains high, and economic growth hasn’t returned.
In sum, all incumbents, even ones with adoring media coverage and magnificent speaking skills, face certain realities. Economic chaos is the responsibility of the party in power. Wrong track numbers in excess of 65% correlate with rejection of incumbents. And there is nowhere for the party in power to hide if they control both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.
My emphasis; read the whole thing.
; ?>/images/user.png)
; ?>/images/email.png)
; ?>/images/feed.png)
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
I see three possibilities:
The first is that Obama really thinks his plans will rescue the economy. This is either a typical socialist’s delusions about economics, or a typical socialist’s hubris. (“I can make socialism work.”)
The second is that Obama doesn’t think his plans will save the economy, but he believes that he can get reelected anyway. Given that Roosevelt was reelected after four and then eight years of not ending the Great Depression, there may be something to this. He is either banking on his charisma and media support, or he plans to turn ACORN into something that will, in some manner, prevent a successful challenge.
The third is that Obama has already given up all hope of reelection, and is putting as thick a gold plating on his parachute as he can. He would be a shoo-in for UN Secretary General, especially if his policies wreck the US; then everyone will love him.