(Untitled)

[mijopo]

 You know, I dumped on Novak a few posts ago, but the more I think about it, the less convinced I am that he's wrong, i.e., I don't really have a strong sense that the country has taken a very hard turn to the left or given much the Democrats much of a mandate, as groundbreaking as this election is in some historical respects.

McCain lost, but he

Comments

Re: A couple of thoughts

[mijopo]

Yes, I should have been clearer, I think he has a mandate a bigger one than ever given GWB and Novak was indeed caught using the MO described in your parenthetical comment rather than consistently applying a definition of 'mandate'. I was just arguing that its not an argument for radical leftism.

I agree, this country will never see blowouts of the Alf Landon sort ever again. It's a two party country and it's now full of yellow dog democrats and whatever they call the Republican version of yellow dog democrats.

[bovlb]

You can't have it both ways. You can't say that Obama is centrist, therefore a significant electoral victory doesn't indicate support for his extreme left-wing policies. Either way you cut it, he has a clear mandate for his stated policies.

BTW, how is "landslide" supposed to be defined? Wikipedia lists the most recent presidential election, but gives a wooly definition. People in the media seem to be talking as if there's a precise (but unrevealed) definition.

Left, Right, Center

[bovlb]

I have a very different view of whether Obama is left or right or center. That said: If the left is communism, then I suppose there are few true leftists in North America that have any political voice or viability. As such, if that is left, I can accept your proposition as to Obama not being a leftist. But for the US, he is the most left candidate since FDR. And FDR represented a dramatic shift left -- i.e.,it was at that time that so-called conservatives & so-called liberals separated not only from the means to the end -- they also separated as to the desired end. US liberals & conservatives do not agree on the end. That is a key distinction. Whether you call it left or right. The chasm is big & just got bigger. Whether it "left enough" or "right enough" for a particular political appetite is less relevant from my vantage point. The gap between the 2 is the measure in my book. And it is growing -- e.g., bigger government, increased progressity of the tax system vs. smaller government & flatter taxes. (I unfortunately cannot

Re: Left, Right, Center

[mijopo]

Perhaps the chasm between left and right has grown bigger, I don't know. But in terms of the practical upshot of the way the right, i.e., Republicans, and left, i.e., Democrats, govern, I'm hard pressed to see huge differences or evidence that the chasm has grown wider. (what have the Dems. done since gaining more control in '06?) Are the Republicans a good representative of the right or the Democrats a good representative of the left in this country? I don't know, I suspect not. I suspect both are trying to keep the center happier than perhaps it should be kept. But if we're not to look there it becomes fairly difficult to get any kind of measure of the alleged chasm, perhaps from Gallup polls or some such

[mijopo]

My point is that he presented as a relatively conservative politician and despite this didn't pull out a very big win over McCain, i.e., this remains a very conservative country, not one that has taken a big jump towards left wing policies. He has a mandate, I don't deny that, but it's not surprising that Pelosi is now talking about governing from the middle, it's very hard to infer that anything more liberal has been endorsed by the voters.

tax cuts

[anonymous]

I think it's settled that, in general, tax cuts are a stimulus to a stagnating economy. Perhaps Obama is pragmatic in this sense--it's not just campaign-to-the-center tactics. I'd consider it a mark of his leadership if he "gets" the core conservative message that taxes, while good for Government, tend not to be the best recipe for jump-starting economies languishing for lack of spending. To put it another way, if we have less, we spend less. And if getting people to spend is the conunundrum, giving them more (e.g., by taking from them less), makes sense.

So whatever Obama's real motivations for proposing tax cuts (running in this sense on a conservative message), he's probably got it right given our current economic woes. Here's a message that right or (pragmatic) left can agree on. Perhaps.

Re: tax cuts

[mijopo]

True, but Obama's tax plan was in place well before the economy went completely down the toilet. He was continuing the Bush tax cuts, most of them, and there's certainly no consensus that that would have been advisable given the size of the deficit.

Re: tax cuts

[anonymous]

The tax cut issue is, of course, the classic "teeter totter" dilemma. As it goes: raising taxes grows the tax base, but curtails business sector incentives, which ultimately shrinks the tax base, and on and on

Re: tax cuts

[mijopo]

I was focusing on income tax cuts in my original comments. Corporate tax rates are a condundrum of our own making. I wish more people had seen through globalization's bullshit, i.e., giving businesses complete freedom to move goods, services and companies while continuing to restrict labor. Free markets, my ass