Obama Vulnerable to Counterattack on Economy

Obama Vulnerable to Counterattack on Economy

Dick Morris
July 14, 2010

Any president facing a recession has a basic conundrum to resolve: If he doesn't try to make people believe that a recovery is in progress, nobody will. But if he tries to make them believe that all is getting better, he risks being seen as out of touch at best or insensitive at worst.

It was just such a predicament that landed George H.W. Bush in trouble in 1991, when he preached that the economy was emerging from the recession, only to be seen as rich and elitist for his efforts. Things got so bad that this verbally challenged president once blurted out his staff's strategy memo by saying "Message: I care." That was about as well received as Richard Nixon's statement that "I am not a crook."

Now Obama is trying to sell the unsellable -- that the economy is getting better. In Nevada, he said: "But the question is, number one: Are we on the right track? And the answer is yes."

Presumably those who are gullible enough to think they can beat the casino odds in Vegas are ripe for this form of self-delusion, but it leaves the rest of us cold. The fact is that, when asked directly in polls whether the U.S. is on the right or the wrong track, by more than two to one, Americans feel the nation is on the wrong track.

Fifteen million are unemployed, and adding in underemployed, part-time workers and those who have given up looking, the total is 26 million. So Obama's statements of confidence are a bit like Herbert Hoover's ritual incantation that "prosperity is just around the corner."

Polls show that 70 percent of Americans do not believe that the stimulus program has worked, and a similar percentage feel the best thing we could do to create jobs is to cut taxes.

But Obama's conundrum is that if he is not the font of optimism, who will be? Economists are increasingly coming to see that the so-called recovery was, in fact, a false dawn and that we are entering a double-dip recession (if, indeed, we ever left the initial downturn).

It is now for the Republicans to counterattack against Obama by calling him out of touch with the realities of the economy and to take advantage of the frequently held idea that the president doesn't know what is going on in the streets. In Obama's case, the GOP cannot then turn "out of touch" into an accusation of insensitivity (as the Democrats did to Bush-41). But they can push the idea that Obama is so wrapped up in his liberal ideology that he cannot see the reality in front of him -- that big spending stimulus hasn't worked and won't work.

The Fox News poll now shows that 55 percent of all likely voters feel that it is appropriate to call Obama a socialist. This epithet, which most Americans did not see fit to use even a few months ago, fits him well. Republicans should make the point that he is willing to sacrifice all for his ideology and that he is blind to the reality of the damage his spending and borrowing are causing.

When a president runs around the country saying things that two-thirds of America does not believe, it is time to counterattack vigorously and show how out of touch he really is.

Then, with every aversion of optimism, Obama will be digging himself deeper and deeper into the hole.

Dick Morris is a former political adviser to President Bill Clinton

I'm always concerned about how unemployment figures are manipulated by the government and by opponents quoting "real figures".

From the government's perspective, I'm concerned that they are manipulating data and classing as students those people who are on training courses and part time education but still claiming some sort of unemployment benefit. This was a trick that the last Tory government here pulled and one that Labour carried on. Figures are being artificially deflated to make the figures look good.

On the flip side, I'm concerned that people are being labelled "unemployed and not looking" because they genuinely are in education or have taken early retirement, they are being included to make the figures look worse than they actually are.

Where unemployment figures are concerned, we must always exercise caution in both extremes.

TexasBlue wrote:The Fox News poll now shows that 55 percent of all likely voters feel that it is appropriate to call Obama a socialist.

And he still isn't.

TexasBlue wrote:
The Fox News poll now shows that 55 percent of all likely voters feel that it is appropriate to call Obama a socialist.

My spin: the Fox News pool shows that 55% of all likely voters have no idea what socialism is.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:I'm always concerned about how unemployment figures are manipulated by the government and by opponents quoting "real figures".

From the government's perspective, I'm concerned that they are manipulating data and classing as students those people who are on training courses and part time education but still claiming some sort of unemployment benefit. This was a trick that the last Tory government here pulled and one that Labour carried on. Figures are being artificially deflated to make the figures look good.

On the flip side, I'm concerned that people are being labelled "unemployed and not looking" because they genuinely are in education or have taken early retirement, they are being included to make the figures look worse than they actually are.

Where unemployment figures are concerned, we must always exercise caution in both extremes.

Over here, you qualify for unemployment if you go to school and had lost a job which drove you to go to start with.

The gov't isn't including stats of people who have run out of unemployment. There's thousands who have in the last year or so. The real unemployment is higher than gov't figures. The gov't can only officially go by how many are drawing unemployment. So, the current figure is 9.5%. The real figure is estimated to be around 15%. That's alot either way you look at it.

If the GOP were in control of congress and the WH right now, they'd be suffering at the polls as the Dems are.

alland wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:
The Fox News poll now shows that 55 percent of all likely voters feel that it is appropriate to call Obama a socialist.

My spin: the Fox News pool shows that 55% of all likely voters have no idea what socialism is.

Maybe. But according to this, it isn't so much Fox News driven.

Obama's a socialist. That's the view of 55% of American voters, according to a new poll. And this isn't coming from a Republican pollster.

It comes from Democracy Corps, a polling group started by life-long Democratic operative James Carville and his partner Stan Greenberg. When the group asked 1,000 voters in mid-June how well the term "socialist" fits President Obama, 55% said "well" or "very well."

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/government/official-obama-socialist/

My comment wasn't about Fox news, just those who answered their poll.

Polls aren't always accurate. This year they might be. I've used them to make a point but i always say that they never asked me, so how can it be accurate?

And the other thing is that even if they accurately portray what people believe, that doesn't always make it so. Let's say, for example, a poll said that 35% of Americans believed that a UFO crashed in Roswell, Nm. in '47. Well, does that make it a fact? So, a slim majority of Americans feel that Obama's policies are socialist, but that's just perception. The sad part is that it still hurts him, even if voters are misguided or know nothing about politics.

The thing about polls like this one is that we don't know where it was taken, what district, what the political leanings are. None of that. We know who conducted the poll which is fair enuff. But if you poll a county that votes Republican, you're going to get this kind of answer.

Yeah -- that's why I never trust polls completely.

alland wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:
The Fox News poll now shows that 55 percent of all likely voters feel that it is appropriate to call Obama a socialist.

My spin: the Fox News pool shows that 55% of all likely voters have no idea what socialism is.

Agreed. "Argumentum ad populum" as it is called, proves nothing.

TexasBlue wrote:The thing about polls like this one is that we don't know where it was taken, what district, what the political leanings are. None of that. We know who conducted the poll which is fair enuff. But if you poll a county that votes Republican, you're going to get this kind of answer.

And if it was a phone or internet vote, aren't right wingers more likely to watch Fox?

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:Agreed. "Argumentum ad populum" as it is called, proves nothing.

But the poll wasn't FNC. It was Democracy Corps, a polling group started by life-long Democratic operative James Carville.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:And if it was a phone or internet vote, aren't right wingers more likely to watch Fox?

That's an assumption. Around 30% of Fox's audience are Democrats.

Which means that 70% are not Democrats.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:Which means that 70% are not Democrats.

And again, liberals have MSNBC, CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, Atlanta Constitution Journal and the Los Angeles Times. Yet people make a big deal out of FNC. It's nutz. What it is, is that nobody on the left likes a channel that reports things that the left leaning ones don't (or won't). I can put up a few examples of stories that the press blatantly ignored until they had to report it... after it was reported on for days by FNC. It seems to me that if we conservatives didn't have a channel like FNC that there'd be plenty of tings that wouldn't be reported on at all.

I would say the same thing if an apparent "liberal" network asked the question "Is Sarah Palin religious zealot?" I would also point to the fact that people of a certain persuasion are more likely to view the channel and vote.

When i watch MSNBC (very rarely but i do). i see the typical liberal talking points. I see the usual demonization of the right. I expect it from that channel. I really do. It's why i don't watch it. Very rarely do you get a liberal and a conservative on a panel to debate an issue. You get Olbermann with whatever liberal he can get and they go to town. At least on FNC, you get one of each on whatever debate they're having. It's up to me, the viewer, to decide which one is full of shit or even taking the best ideas of both to draw a conclusion.

But if i watch Olbermann, i expe3ct the same thing that the left expects when they watch Sean Hannity. You get opinions on the news of the day.

I separate that from the news itself. When i watch ABC Evening News, i want a straight balanced report during their newscast. Sometimes i get it, sometimes i don't. If i watch Special Report with Bret Baier, i expect the same. These two programs report the news. They're not commentary or opinions.

TexasBlue wrote:

alland wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:
The Fox News poll now shows that 55 percent of all likely voters feel that it is appropriate to call Obama a socialist.

My spin: the Fox News pool shows that 55% of all likely voters have no idea what socialism is.

Maybe. But according to this, it isn't so much Fox News driven.

Obama's a socialist. That's the view of 55% of American voters, according to a new poll. And this isn't coming from a Republican pollster.

It comes from Democracy Corps, a polling group started by life-long Democratic operative James Carville and his partner Stan Greenberg. When the group asked 1,000 voters in mid-June how well the term "socialist" fits President Obama, 55% said "well" or "very well."

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/government/official-obama-socialist/

I remember in the other thread that only about 49% of Americans could name the branches of government... should we really assume that Americans know the definition of Socialism better than the 3 branches of government?

[quote="BubbleBliss]
I remember in the other thread that only about 49% of Americans could name the branches of government... should we really assume that Americans know the definition of Socialism better than the 3 branches of government?
[/quote]

They do when Faux News tells them what ut is.

Exactly what I'm thinking. You tell people something enough times, they'll believe it!

BubbleBliss wrote:
Exactly what I'm thinking. You tell people something enough times, they'll believe it!

Or as I saw in a cartoon recently: "If you repeat a lie often enough, you're a Republican."