‘The white working class’
Posted inPolitics: National

‘The white working class’

CyXTc61UUAAGbmJ
After the stunning defeat of Hillary Clinton, progressive mandarins are calling for a complete rebuilding of the Democratic Party. Here, for example, is Robert Reich's eight-step program. Unlike the Republicans after defeat, who double down on their ideological convictions and nihilistic congressional maneuvers, it may well happen. And it may be for the good. I don't know.

One thing I doubt is that the Democrats can win back the vaunted white working class. Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan, who is challenging Nancy Pelosi for House Minority Leader, said, “We need to speak to their economic interests, that we get it, that we understand, that we talk about those things and we try to fight hard for those things.”

Well, how? President Obama saved General Motors, including the Lordstown, Ohio, assembly. Yet that county supported Trump over Clinton by six points. Obamacare provided more health insurance for whites than for blacks and Hispanics combined. Yet exit polls show whites voted 58 percent for Trump vs. 37 percent for Clinton, who had detailed policy proposals to help working Americans. As you can see from the map above, the Rust Belt states that went for Trump have plenty of counties that were doing well. The same thing with the hard-red South. (Although, as I wrote in the Seattle Times, blue states are the economic superstars for reasons that most red states shun).

Perspective is important. Hillary Clinton has won a larger majority of the popular vote than any candidate in modern history who did not also win the Electoral College. We vote by states, but even here it was a near-run thing. Trump won Michigan's 16 electoral votes by two-tenths of a percentage point (how'd that protest vote work out for you?). In the end, she couldn't get the low-single-digit additional points in key states that Obama had previously won.

63
Posted inUncategorized

President Hoover and Depression thinking

I feel the need to come to the defense of Herbert Hoover, if for no other reason than this fundamental misreading of history will only set us up for costly mistakes in the future. The left long has labeled George W. Bush "President Hoover" for presiding over a historic economic crisis. Now the meme has been picked up by the right, as well.

Yet to paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, President Bush, you're no Herbert Hoover. Among the differences: Hoover (1874-1964) was a self-made man, who worked his way through the new Stanford University, made a fortune as a brilliant engineer, then gained international acclaim for coordinating relief for refugees in World War I. Although a Republican, Hoover came from the party's Theodore Roosevelt progressive wing. He was mistrusted by Calvin Coolidge, and for good reason. Hoover wanted to move away from the rapacious capitalism of the 1920s to an ethic that embraced the common good and the obligations of business to society. He was a product of his time of scientific and engineering wonders: The Great Engineer, who could bring pragmatic, fact-based solutions to governing.

Unfortunately, Hoover was elected in 1929, not 1912 — the era in which his worldview had been shaped. After the great crash and with the gathering depression, Hoover was overwhelmed. His administration launched the greatest expansion of government intervention in the economy up to that point, including programs and ideas that would live on in the New Deal. Yet it did little good as unemployment reached a staggering 25 percent and Americans were forced into shantytowns they called Hoovervilles.

10
Posted inPolitics: National

On the convention: Will Obama be FDR or Bryan?

Let me begin my convention observations by saying: I don’t trust the media. Whatever the Democrats and Obama do, it will be "the wrong thing" per the corporate media narrative. He still hasn’t "sealed the deal" and "closed the sale." He "lacks specifics" — a lie — and if he provided more, they would be instant red meat. If 75,000 people in the stadium hear one of the great speeches of our time — as happened in Philadelphia on the race issue — it will be swept away by the coiffed broomheads of television pundits.

As Michelle’s speech confirmed, the Obama’s have done everything the "conservatives" demand of black folks — and they’re still "foreign." He’s a celebrity — that’s bad. Americans "don’t know who he is" — as if they know who the hell John McCain is. He’s "not one of us" — as if that has any meaning in an America of diverse life paths, or that a former POW, longtime right-wing capo and rich consort of a beer heiress is "one of us." "One of us" is a stupid person, as the media would have it — because, after all, education and the ability to speak in complete sentences = elitism.

The best way to watch the convention is on CSPAN, so you hear all the speeches, not merely the prime-time ones that are filtered and "interpreted" by the bubbleheads. Of course, most Americans don’t do this. So they watch the prime-time spectacle as the Democrats try, again, to figure out how to beat the Republicans. Somehow eight years of misgovernment on an unprecedented scale isn’t enough. Nor is the obvious failure/scam that is "conservative ideas" in action. The right has wrecked the country and yet the presidential polls, if they are to be believed, show Obama struggling to stay even.

1