democracycorps.com — Democrats have a 4-point advantage on the measure of “being on your side” and this is important. When evaluating which party could do a better job handling a variety of economic issues, Democrats continue to match-up terribly. Health care’s passage did not produce even a point rise in the president’s approval rating. But Democrats report a warmer..
Apr 27, 2010 View in Crawl 4
kaelyiestaApr 27, 2010
It's also dangerous. If those systemic problems of our economic system are left unaddressed(and they are) we will mistake the cause of any improvements, and allow them to persist to create further problems later. If some industries slave away to stay afloat and provide us with some economic prosperity, it doesn't justify our broken banking system for example. It just covers it up.This is what I feared when the housing problem began to be noticed. We would not understand the validity of various economic factors and attribute our 'salvation' to the wrong things. This is why I continuously attack the worth of things like GDP as a measure of prosperity(it isn't, I could pay a guy to dig and fill a hole to increase spending but overall wealth would decrease. Worse, we'd be misallocating labor.), the U3 unemployment measurement (opposed to u6 and other measures of employment that don't discount those who have been unemployed for a longer time <a class="user" href="http://www.shadowstats.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.shadowstats.com/</a> ), and so on.Confidence is a good thing for an economy, but only if that confidence is justified. An economy based upon faith and fear alone is doomed for continual disasters. There must be a real foundation of productivity. If people have misplaced belief in how things are doing, it will hurt both them and the entire economy if they act in accordance with that misinformation.
Closed AccountApr 28, 2010
"Democracy Corps is an independent, non-profit organization dedicated to making the government of the United States more responsive to the American people. It was founded in 1999 by James Carville and Stanley Greenberg. Democracy Corps provides free public opinion research and strategic advice to those dedicated to a more responsive Congress and Presidency.The organization was born out of outrage over the impeachment of President Clinton when the leadership in Congress preferred radical partisanship to addressing the issues which really matter to American families. Following the 2000 election, Democracy Corps rededicated itself after the presidential candidate with the most votes and the most popular policy agenda did not become the President of the United States."Of course this won't be biased towards either political party./s
peppermintpigApr 28, 2010
The premise under which any political party functions is similar, even if some members only participate for the sake of appearances but otherwise disregard laws or fiscal accountability to their own advantage (and there are MANY incentives for a politician or bureaucrat disregard frugality).Despite the generalization which is made about what people in parties think and do, the underlying mechanism remains the same, so yes, I can agree, but I would have to apply it to all parties.
smacksawApr 28, 2010
The Democrats gains came from a lot of swing districts. They're called swing states/districts for a reason. They swing back.
smacksawApr 28, 2010
I think it's simple for Democrats to hold on to what they had or to win: say that they need a majority so that there are no more filibusters. If they frame it as simple obstructionism and that they "are here to work and not play political games", they can win independents.I don't even like many of the Democrats policies, but I support them more than Republicans because it's clear to me that the Democrats are there to work and the Republicans are there to tank gov't at any cost to get their seats back. I want the Republicans to stop filibustering and in there with the Democrats offering input on what the Democratic majority wants to do. What is most insulting is that Obama would force congressional Democrats to give the Republicans a seat at the table, yet they don't do it.I am most disgusted with the games of the Republicans. I think the more that Democrats point out the bratty behaviour, the better it is for them. I always vote for some Republicans, but this year I don't know if I will. I want someone who represents me, not who signs on to a federalist platform from the RNC. If I wanted to vote for a f**king federalist, one-party system, I'll vote for a f**king Democrat who will actually do their job.
tunafizzleApr 28, 2010
Of course Carville is going to be biased toward the left; he is a strategist/consultant on the left and has been for decades. As far as his polling methods being impartial; any strategist's job depends on being able to carry out polls. That's why Carville and Begala are the only dem strategists that are still alive that won a presidential election (aside from Axelrod until recently obviously)
Closed AccountApr 28, 2010
It's not that neither party can be trusted, but rather that nobody can really be trusted. There will always be corruption no matter who is in charge.
peppermintpigApr 29, 2010
It's not that nobody can be trusted, but that you should use common sense and be wary of people you don't know... but participation in the system implies a level of tolerance to the violence applied under the aegis of the state, which is why people who participate are doubly damned to be untrustworthy and even complicit in its growth, corruption, murder, etc.Violence and corruption are implied when the system is imposed upon you without the freedom to dissent and choose.Corruption is an eventuality in a system with arbitrary forms of accountability, also claiming the authority to regulate itself.