Saturday, January 31, 2015
Friday, January 30, 2015
The U.S. Is Getting More Liberal With Each Generation
It seems to be the general consensus of many political pundits that the United States is a conservative country. I don't really believe that, and I posted the other day about how most people claim to be conservative but believe in progressive ideas. That's because the right-wing, with the help of the corporate media, has been able to demonize the word "liberal".
But the good news is that with each generation, Americans are not only accepting liberal ideas, but are more willing to accept the liberal label. The chart above is from the Gallup Poll. They do a yearly survey of how Americans refer to themselves politically (with the last being done throughout 2014 of a random sample of 16,479 adults. Each group in the survey has a margin of error of 2 points. The generational groups are:
Traditionalists (born 1900-1945)
Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964)
Gen Xers (born 1965-1979)
Millennials (born 1980-1996)
The numbers on the chart above represent the conservative to liberal ratio of each generation (arrived at by subtracting those claiming to be liberal from those claiming to be conservative). That means the higher the number, the more conservative the group -- and the lower the number, the more liberal.
While each group goes up and down slightly each year, it is remarkable just how stable they are. And the important thing to note from the chart is how each generation is less conservative (and therefore more liberal) than the last. That is good news for the future of this country.
Public Is Starting To Understand "Trickle-Down" Is Nonsense
Since the Reagan administration the Republicans have instituted and protected an economic theory they have long believed in -- a theory that led to the vast wealth and income inequality of the 1920's, and led directly to the Great Depression. That theory has once again led to a huge gap in wealth and income between the rich and the rest of America, and that gap is still growing.
That economic theory is commonly called the "Trickle-Down" theory. The idea is that what's good for the rich and the corporations is good for all Americans -- and that when the wealth and income increases for the rich, some of it will trickle down to the rest of America.
This theory dictates that labor unions should be weakened, that the minimum wage should be kept low (or abolished), that corporations should get big subsidies from government and be allowed to export jobs to low-wage countries, that Wall Street and the giant financial institutions should be deregulated, and that government social programs should be drastically cut (or eliminated). But the main thrust of this theory is to keep lowering taxes for the rich and the corporations.
If this economic theory really worked, then we should be in the midst of a booming economy -- an economy that is creating jobs and increasing the well-being of all Americans. After all, the theory has been in effect for at least three decades now. But instead of benefitting all Americans, it has had just the opposite effect.
Wages are stagnant (and have been for decades), the middle class is shrinking, the minimum wage has lost a third of its buying power, good jobs are being exported and replaced with low-wage jobs, millions of Americans remain jobless, poverty and hunger continue to grow, and a college education has been priced out of reach of many people. The theory in application has fattened the bank accounts of the rich and the profits of corporations, but nothing has trickled down to the bottom 80%-90% of Americans.
And the Republicans, after seizing control of both houses of Congress, want to double-down on their failed theory. They want to give even more tax cuts to the rich and the corporations, and pay for it with more cuts to government programs that help the poor, uneducated, unemployed, and other disadvantaged people.
Fortunately, the American people are starting to realize just how much they have been fooled by the GOP's unfair view of economics. As the top chart shows, only 29% still believe the "Trickle-Down" theory can work, while 45% no longer believe in it (a 16 point gap). And when the question is asked differently, focusing on the main tenet of the theory (cutting taxes for the rich), the gap grows to 24 points (with 25% saying it'll work and 49% saying it won't). That is illustrated by the chart below.
This gives me some hope that a change can be made, and we can institute economic policies that will be fair to all Americans. Unfortunately, the Republicans are still pandering to the rich, so that change will require voting them out of power -- and that cannot happen until at least 2016.
These charts were made from a new YouGov Poll that was done on January 21st and 22nd of a random national sample of 1,000 adults, with a margin of error of about 4 points.
Republicans Are Pushing The Idea Of A Warren Candidacy
“Elizabeth Warren says, ‘I’m not running; I don’t want to be president. Translation: ‘I can’t wait and I am running. But I’m just not going to admit it right now.’ ”
Those are the words of right-wing blowhard Rush Limbaugh. He knows the Republicans have little hope of beating Hillary Clinton, and he's dreaming of a scenario in which another Democrat runs against Clinton, and does the dirty work of the GOP by damaging Clinton in the primaries. And he's not the only Republican with that dream.
Several of them have been heard proclaiming what a great candidate Senator Warren would be. They don't really mean it. They hate everything Senator Warren believes in and stands for. They know she couldn't win the Democratic nomination. They are just hoping she'll go to war with Clinton in a vicious and prolonged campaign -- splitting the Democratic Party and weakening Clinton as she enters the general election. They know that is the only hope their own candidate would have against Clinton. Here is how the New York Times puts it:
They have called Senator Elizabeth Warren “an extremely attractive candidate” in the 2016 presidential campaign. They have said that she is the “hottest commodity” in the Democratic Party and that she has demonstrated the “passion and intensity” that Hillary Rodham Clinton lacks.
Those glowing compliments are not from the liberal activists who are trying to persuade Ms. Warren to challenge Mrs. Clinton, who is expected to be the party’s leading contender in 2016. They come from conservatives who are eager to drum up a contentious Democratic primary and who see Ms. Warren, a first-term senator from Massachusetts, as best positioned to weaken, and potentially defeat, Mrs. Clinton.
On cable television and in private strategy sessions, conservatives are steadily stoking the flames of a movement to recruit Ms. Warren, who has said she will not run but whose anti-Wall Street economic message resonates with the liberal base of the Democratic Party.
“Please give us Elizabeth Warren. Please, God, let us have Elizabeth Warren,” said Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, who is considering a presidential bid.
“I respect her because she has the courage to speak her convictions,” Mr. Huckabee said on Fox News.
Former Representative Michele Bachmann, a Tea Party Republican from Minnesota, told CNN that Ms. Warren would be “an extremely attractive candidate.” Mrs. Bachmann also said that if she were Mrs. Clinton, she would be “extremely concerned.”
The tactic says much about the 2016 landscape for Republicans. A crowded field of people who say they are considering running for president — including Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and the 2012 presidential nominee, Mitt Romney — has emerged. That means the party is expecting a bruising ideological battle for the nomination.
Mrs. Clinton, a former secretary of state and 2008 presidential candidate, could emerge from the primary season relatively unscathed. Other Democrats — including Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, former Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland and Senator Bernard Sanders, independent of Vermont — may also run, but at this early stage, none are expected to have the funding or political apparatus to pose a serious threat to Mrs. Clinton.
An easy path to the nomination could allow Mrs. Clinton to enter a general election with more funding than the Republican nominee, who would have had to spend heavily to beat a wide field of competitors. Ms. Warren represents Republicans’ best hope for an expensive, prolonged battle for the Democratic nomination, weakening Mrs. Clinton along the way, political operatives on both sides say.
But Senator Elizabeth Warren is no fool. She knows what they are trying to do, and she has no intention of doing their dirty work for them. She has repeatedly and emphatically stated that she has no intention of running for president in 2016 -- and in fact, supports the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.
A small cadre of progressives in the Democratic Party are still urging Senator Warren to change her mind and run (and the Republicans are fervently hoping they will succeed). But Warren has dashed those hopes at every opportunity.
And last Thursday, she took one more action to make it clear she has no intention of running for president in 2016. Acting on her instructions, Warren's attorney wrote a letter to the FEC making it clear that she has no connection with the PAC called "Ready for Warren", which has been trying to raise money for her to run. That letter is shown below.
It is time for progressives to stop playing into Republicans hopes and dreams. They need to accept Warren's decision, and support Hillary Clinton for the 2016 nomination. It is the best way of insuring an extremist Republican doesn't win the White House in 2016 (which would be disastrous for this country).
Thursday, January 29, 2015
Obamacare Is Growing And Most People Support Subsidies
The bad news just keeps growing for the Republican teabaggers that hate the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). As the chart above shows, the number of people that bought private insurance through the health exchanges authorized Obamacare topped 8 million people for 2014. Now the sign-ups are being done for 2015, and the number of purchasers has already topped 9.5 million (and will likely top 10 million, since the deadline is not until February 15th). With every passing day, there are more people who now have insurance -- and will be angered if the GOP repeals Obamacare and takes that insurance away from them.
Note that I included in the chart above the number of people who have bought their insurance through the federal health care exchange instead of a state exchange -- about 7.1 million (and that is also expected to grow before the deadline in February). I included that, because right-wingers have have case pending in the Supreme Court that would deny the subsidy to anyone getting insurance through the the federal exchange instead of a state exchange. If they win that case, most of that 7.1 million would lose their insurance -- because they got a subsidy to help them pay for it (and probably won't be able to afford insurance without the subsidy).
The congressional Republicans support that right-wing effort, because it would do what they have not been able to do -- virtually destroy Obamacare. But they are playing with fire. As the chart below shows, a significant majority of the American public likes the subsidies -- and if the court rules against those subsidies, they want Congress to re-instate them quickly. That puts the GOP Congress between a rock (their teabagger base) and a hard place (the public). Their only hope of not losing support somewhere is for the Supreme Court to rule against them.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is also news that the House will once again vote to repeal Obamacare. They know that such a move will not be approved by the Senate, and could not survive a presidential veto. But they want to give the new members a chance to vote to repeal to keep their teabagger base in their home districts happy. It is a purely political move. That's good for them, because they would make a lot of people unhappy if they could actually repeal it (a move that would be supported by less than a third of the public).
Congressional Job Approval Is Still Extremely Low
I have been posting recently about the rebounding job approval numbers for President Obama. Several polls show this, and most put his new numbers at around 50% approval. The Rasmussen Poll does a daily survey, and their approval numbers for the president have been bouncing between 48% and 51% for a few weeks now. It seems that many Americans like the strength the president has recently shown -- the fact that he refuses to be a weak "lame duck" president.
But the same cannot be said for Congress. After taking control of both houses of Congress in the last election, the Republicans are claiming they have a mandate to oppose the president and impose their own policies. Unfortunately for them, that is not the view of most Americans. As the chart above shows, the public job approval of Congress is still extremely low -- about 11% (37 to 40 points below presidential job approval). And that 11% is the highest congressional approval registered by Rasmussen since October of 2012.
My question now is -- Where is this public mandate for GOP policies? I submit that it is nonexistent -- a figment of the Republican's imagination.
This chart was made from a recent Rasmussen Poll -- done on January 25th and 26th of a random national sample of 800 likely voters, with a margin of error of 3.5 points.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)