The weatherman on TV describes it every day. "A cold front will pass through our area tomorrow afternoon and with it, a major wind shift."
Historians may one day pinpoint the last several weeks as the time when the front passed -- and the political winds shifted decisively.
The combination of Governor Scott Walker's proposal to strip middle class union members of their rights to have a seat at the table in determining their wages and working conditions -- and the draconian cuts in services to average Americans promoted by Republicans in Congress -- have caused a fundamental shift in American public opinion and political momentum.
Three major Republican political mistakes have contributed mightily to their sinking political fortunes, and they could spell disaster for their candidates next November.
First, Republicans forgot the fundamental truth that it is much more difficult to take something away from people that they already have, than to prevent them from getting something for which they aspire.
It's one thing to campaign against the possibility of better health care -- or against legislation that would restrain the power of banks to sink the economy. It's quite another to propose measures that would cut someone's pay, eliminate their power to bargain, or slash services that benefit everyday Americans -- even worse to propose cutting Social Security or Medicare. Those kinds of proposals are downright personal. They really make people angry.
Nothing changes a political calculus like "facts on the ground." That's why the Republicans are crusading so hard to prevent the Affordable Health Care Act from being implemented. Once it's in force, millions of stakeholders will form a political army that will prevent it from ever being repealed.
For the year after Medicare was passed in 1965, support was pretty lukewarm. Once people started benefiting, support skyrocketed. Now, of course, it's the Republicans (who actually opposed Medicare) who tried to convince seniors that the Affordable Health Care Law would cut their Medicare benefits -- which of course it did not.
During the health care battle, Republicans banked heavily on the fact that those who aspired to get health insurance would not be as well organized or as vocal as those who feared that the law might cause them to lose the health coverage they already had. Their entire strategy was based on building fear among the vast majority who had insurance or Medicare. That is one of the reasons why it was so difficult to pass health care reform. It's also why -- even though Democrats won the battle to pass the bill -- we, temporarily at least, lost the war for public opinion.
Had a public option -- or Medicare buy-in for those under 65 -- been part of the measure, a large number of people would have been vested with benefits much sooner than the 2014 effective date, when most of the other benefits take effect. It simply would not have taken four years to construct a system that allowed people below 65 to buy in to Medicare, which of course is an on-going concern. That would have increased levels of public support for the law much more rapidly, and is one of the reasons Republicans fought these provisions so doggedly.
Of course there are, in fact, many Americans who already benefit from the health care law -- including hospitals full of sick kids who are no longer subject to the insurance industry's outrageous lifetime caps or limitations on coverage for pre-existing conditions. And more and more of the public is coming to realize that Republican claims that the law would degrade their current benefits are simply deceitful propaganda.
But the fact is that most historic changes in the political wind have happened as a result of major political battles that involved actual or perceived attempts to take away concrete benefits already enjoyed by a large segment of the electorate.
The game-changing battle that turned the tide after the Republican sweep of 1994 involved the Republican shutdown of the Government and their attempt to cut Medicare and Medicaid. After the disastrous Bush re-election of 2004, the winds shifted toward Democrats when Bush tried to privatize Social Security. The health care battle -- and the perceived attempt by Obama to undermine current health care benefits -- set the table for the Democratic defeat in 2010. Of course, the financial collapse that cost millions of Americans their pensions and jobs closed the door on any possibility that the Republicans who presided over the disaster could defeat Barack Obama in 2008.
The Republicans have forgotten this important history lesson. Take away things that people already have and you're in for a world of trouble.
Want to know how completely they've forgotten this lesson? Just last week, House Speaker John Boehner actually told the Wall Street Journal that his budget will attempt to cut Social Security and Medicare. This, in spite of polling that shows virtually zero support among the voters. There will be a firestorm of opposition. Go right ahead, John, make our day.
Second, the Republicans have forgotten the all-important political principle, that you can't believe your own spin. That's especially true if you spend all of your time talking to the small group of people who agree with you. Take the House of Representative's newly-elected Tea Party Caucus. This insular crew talks to each other -- repeats each other's slogans -- listens to Fox News and has convinced themselves that most Americans agree that government spending is the worst thing since murder and mayhem.
They have talked themselves into actually believing that the "American people" sent them to Washington to cut back on the "massive growth" of the federal government and cut spending at all costs. This was, of course, never the case. The Republicans won in November mainly on the strength of a protest vote from an electorate that was furious that the economy had not improved -- that there were not enough jobs.
But now that the Republicans have begun to propose concrete cuts to important public services, their view of what the "American people" want is completely disconnected from reality.
Last week's NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed that a 51% to 46% majority says the government should do more, rather than less. Fifty-six percent say that jobs and economic growth should be the government's top priority compared to 40% who rate deficit reduction that way.
By 54% to 18%, Americans do not believe that cuts in Medicare are necessary to reduce the deficit. Forty-nine to twenty-two percent say cuts in Social Security are not needed. Fifty-six percent say cuts in Headstart Programs are "mostly" or "totally unacceptable." Seventy-seven percent say the same of cuts in primary and secondary education. Majorities also call unacceptable cuts to defense, unemployement insurance, student loans, and heating assistance to low-income families.
On the other hand, while Republicans rail against increases in taxes -- even for the rich, a whopping 81% favor placing a surtax on people who make more than a million dollars. Sixty-eight percent want to end the Bush tax cuts on those who make over $250,000.
An overwhelming 77% support the right of public employees to collective bargaining.
To top it off, a Rasmussen (Republican) poll shows Wisconsin Governor Walker's positives dropping to 43%, and his negatives soaring to 57%.
The winds have shifted -- and because they believe their own spin, many Republicans have yet to notice.
Bottom line is that these guys think they're flying straight and level, and they're really in a steep dive.
Third, the Republicans have failed to learn that you can tell people that up is down, and black is white, for only so long. Or to paraphrase one of the founders of the Republican Party: "You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
Over and over, the Republicans have repeated their mantra that we need to "cut spending" in order to create jobs. Now, it is certainly true that controlling the nation's long-term deficit will benefit the economy in the long haul. You can even make a case that when government debt begins to sop up lots of available credit, it can be a drag on private sector investment and growth. But no reputable economist agrees that cutting spending now -- as we are just emerging from a recession -- will create jobs. Just the opposite.
Companies are sitting on two trillion dollars of cash. There is no shortage of capital for expansion. There is a shortage of economic demand. Businesses invest in new plants and equipment and hire new workers when there are people out there demanding their products and services.
That's why economists like Mark Zandi, of Moody Analytics, who was an economic adviser to John McCain's presidential campaign, issued a study last week showing that the HR1 -- the Republican spending bill for this year -- would destroy 700,000 jobs.
That's why Goldman Sachs -- hardly a left-leaning economic institution -- issued a report saying that the Republican budget plan will knock 2% off this year's GDP, which would do real damage considering that the Government expects the GDP to increase only 2.7% this year.
And the public is beginning to get the picture. The polling shows that voters want investments that actually do increase long-term growth -- investments in education, research and infrastructure -- that will allow us to win the future.
American voters are a pretty smart group. If they are presented a choice between recklessly slashing the budget on the one hand, and investing to assure that our kids will have more opportunities than we do, they choose the future every time. After all, what Americans really want is to feel confident that together we can once again reclaim the American dream.
Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com.
We are dependent on China to lend us money for our squandering ways. Their stated goal is to rule the world and we are helping them. The 'new war' will be waged economically. We've already had one attack on our financial system.
We've already seen a few countries go bankrupt. We are seeing many of our states on the verge of bankruptcy. SOMETHING has to change...
Recently, Harry Reid was on the floor bemoaning cuts that will impact the yearly 'cowboy poetry festival' in his state!!?!?!
Should the police in NJ be able to retire at age 41 with 80% (and benefits) of their maximum pay for life?!!?
Should we give free medical for illegals while citizens have to pay for theirs? Should the NY school system subsidize the teacher's union $10million/yr?
The govt. accounting office says we have hundreds of millions in waste and duplication. Do we have the stomach to eliminate that waste?
Will both parties face reality?
BTW: the 90+ democrats that were just voted out of office gave about $8million in bonuses to their staff on the way out... Morally, they should not have done that, but then... they are democrats who are used to squandering tax payers money.
“That would have increased levels of public support for the law much more rapidly, and is one of the reasons Republicans fought these provisions so doggedly”.
We progressives want single payer. We compromised with public option would reduce costs. I maintain that the most cost saving issue is having Advanced Directives! Make them doable with driver license like organ donation is.
“Just last week, House Speaker John Boehner actually told the Wall Street Journal that his budget will attempt to cut Social Security and Medicare”.
Reagan had a plan called Starve the Beast. The plan is to run up deficits so as to defund and eliminate entitlements. Bush put it in overdrive. Look it up. I’ll get busted if I say another word.
Referencing the Tea Party, “They have talked themselves into actually believing that the "American people" sent them to Washington to cut back on the "massive growth" of the federal government and cut spending at all costs”.
If they ever fact check, watch out. Tell the Tea Party they are mere pawns in over their head in pay to play politics. When they find out they are going to feel betrayed and then they are going to get very angry. “Covert Operations”.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=all
Is that the one full of people who never complained or protested government spending while Bush and the GOP rang up $5 TRILLION in debt from '00 - '06?
The one with folks who think that the American people have government debt as their #1 priority when, in reality, an overwhelming majority of Americans consider jobs more important -- even if it means more government debt? (Note: link provided upon request.)
The one with folks who never complained about the deficit until a Democrat was elected?
The one with people convinced that Reagan is the bestest president ever, despite the fact he raised taxes and tripled the national debt?
The one with an economic plan that would cost our nation nearly a million jobs, stall economic growth, and do nothing but further enrich the top 10% of wage earners?
That Tea Party Caucus?
Sorry, but the Tea Party is a fad that will fade away once the black guy ... um, I mean Democrat, is out of the White House. Then, magically, all the concerns about debts and deficits will disappear, no matter how much debt or deficits the next GOP president racks up.
After all, that's what's happened in the past 40 years—the GOP has claimed the mantle of "fiscal responsibility!" even though it rang up $10 trillion of our $12 trillion in debt (courtesy of Reagan, Bush I, Bush II).
Reality: Still liberally biased!
" It doesn't matter who does the voting, what matters is who does the counting".
all you said is true - I like the remark about the counting - since my husband does computer systems for poll places, I will pass this on to him
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malalai_Joya
http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/2976466.Malalai_Joya
President John F. Kennedy
Those 2011 elections are looming large, for sure.
O. wanted to initiate Health Care Reform. He described the possible plans as Single Payer & The Public Option. To this moment, the vast majority of Americans have no idea what those terms mean. Listening to politicians, the vast majority of them do not either. Had they simply described Single Payer as essentially what our veterans receive through the VA & The Public Option as Medicare, we would have Single Payer today.
Both parties repeat the same tactics. One is successful, the other fails. Branding DOES matter.
Democrats, on the other hand, have finely tuned the art of shooting themselves in the foot. Example: The "Stimulus." At least that moniker made some sense, though it wasn't the actual name of the bill. But not until long after (months after) every right-leaner from congressional leaders to the uninformed TeaBagger had gotten the chance to beat the bill up with falsehoods did we hear even a peep from the Dems (including the president) about all the tax cuts it included. And drive by any project paid for by the "Stimulus" & what do you see? A sign that touts the work as being made possible by The Recovery Act (the actual name of the "Stimulus" legislation). This allowed GOP congresspeople to spend Thursdays attacking the "Stimulus," then high-tail it to their districts on Fridays for a photo-op, taking credit for a "Recovery Act" program. Nicely played, Dems! (Sheesh).
The PO would have had to charge more in premiums than a group private insurance plan. Why? Simple. It was to be set up with $5 or $10 Billion in funds for set up and reserves but it would have to repay that money in 5 to 10 years (different bill versions). So for the first 5 to 10 years it would have to charge enough for regular costs of providers fees and for equipment as well as the part it would pay for prescriptions PLUS a portion to go to the repayment fund PLUS a portion to go to building its own reserves. Reserves are needed in case of high usage beyond what is covered by premiums, such as if (when) we have a flu pandemic, or some other disaster requiring well above normal health care usage.
Besides that, a PO is NOT a health care plan, it's merely a financing method; insurance. The law that passed works on reducing costs and increasing quality of the actual CARE in addition to the part expanding coverage. Way over 200,000 Americans are killed by preventable medical errors in hospitals each year! That's many times the number who die from lack of care. READ the Bill, at least the section titles. It's really a BFD.
Reimportation won't work; the drug companies will hold a country's scripts to the prior year's level. They would not have drugs for their own people. Maine governor tried this in the 90s.
As per your allegation on "drug companies" colluding to "hold scripts" read the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Better yet, watch the NFL Players lawsuit(s) When and if they decertify the union.Any drug company(s) attempt to "hold scripts" would require wide spread collusion which would kick in anti-trust lawsuits. Read Senator Dorgan's amendment to the health care bill scuttled by gutless Harry Reid, his best buddy Dodd and that hair piece, Ben Nelson.
Republicans for generations have worked toward creating conditions where 95% of the population work until they drop dead so that the 5% at the very top never have to sacrifice, cut back, or change anything of their lifestyle, ever, in good times or bad. Sacrificing, republicans have and continue to make quite clear, are for the people down below, not for those at the top.
The result of republican policies on the American people? higher unemployment ('so be it' as John Boehner says), more jobs going overseas, greater numbers of people and families living in poverty, less and less individual freedom, increased bigotry, purposeful and insidious blaming of these problems on the people, the very groups of people that their policies and subsequent issues are directly affecting.
Recovery will continue and get stronger in those states run by Democratic Governors and legislatures that are focusing on jobs and new investments, on new and rebuilt infrastructure; on energy efficiency, new, renewable and clean energy; on new modes of transportation; on education, research, development and innovation; focusing on health and nutrition, clean air and water; and focusing on and attentive to the needs of the people. It will be these states that lead this country to a brighter future.
Americans are coming to understand the truth of conservative philosophy; greater and greater numbers now understand that conservatism does not include the American worker, American family, American middle class, and have come to recognize conservatism's insidious nature.
Democrats on the other hand have done a terrible job of "branding" themselves. They have in fact allowed republicans to do the "branding" for them. " Tax and spend", "Socialists", "Big government", all perfect examples of Republican branding. They've been brilliant at it. Until democrats overcome republicans determining the democratic brand, they'll always be playing damage control and defense.
Democrats have no strategy what so ever to offensively win elections. They can only play defense and wait for Republicans to screw up. That is how the Dems won back Congress in 2006: the GOP fumbled the ball.
The GOP controls too many levers of government now for the Dems to be able to defeat them.
Their record victories at the local levels will insure their majority for decades.
They will control the senate in 2012 and have a good chance at a super majority there.
They control the Supreme Court.
They control the inferior (a legal term, not a derogatory one) justice system via decades of work by the Federalist society.
They have consolidated their hold over media.
Citizens United allows them access to all the money they need.
When I see the Dems do what the GOP did after the 2008 elections; that is, go from humiliating loses, be in total disaray, have comical figures for leaders, hold a super MINORITY in Congress, have a party chairman (Steele) who is bankrupting the party, recriminations, finger pointing, elected officials arguing with talk show hosts, all that and in just SIX WEEKS (from Inauguration Day to Rick Santelli's rant in early March) they came roaring back:
Formation of teabagger revolt to pretend they are not same old Bush big spenders
August, 2009, implosion of enitre Dem caucus when town hall meetings erupt and prsident on vacation.
Disaterous Election Day, 2009. Two Obama states flip and the legend of Chris Christie is born. Liberals scoff.
January, 2010, win by Scott Brown starts full Dem retreat as president continues to offer compromise with nothing in return.
Disaterous 2010 election season as Dems run away from signature HC legislation and NO Dem campaign slogan gains traction.
Record 2010 losses by Dems.
President capitulates and agrees to tax cut extensions for wealthiest Americans on the way to total control of HIS agenda by GOP.
when the dems can do something like that, then they will be considered a viable politcal party.
And what happened in 2010? oh that's right, the Dems fumbled the ball and the Repubs took advantage of an electorate afraid of job losses and a burning economy. Unless you are being intentionally obtuse that's the strategy of any underdog, wait for those in charge to make a mistake. This really isn't rocket science, even though it sounds like you desperately wish it were.
The GOP went on offense. They made the Dems play on their side of the field. They set the frame and the message and the Dems followed THEIR lead.
They controlled the entire game, said "no" to everything, framed HC reform in a negative way, and made Obama come to them.
That is not the Dems fumbling the ball; they were playing out of their league.
Boy, oh boy! Rachel does it again. Shows a video of Sen. Scott Brown directly soliciting money from one of the Koch brothers. Koch, Koch, Koch . They are everywhere, and he's exposing all their nefarious connections from Gov. Walker, Rep. Pompeo, Sen. Brown, & Supreme Court Injustices Scalia & Thomas!
Stay tuned there may be some real smoke & fire according to Eugene Robinson, in his discussions with Rachel.
Here's my problem:
Why is the guy I helped put in the White House agreeing more with the Republican views on about every subject out there? When does he start framing all of it in a progressive/liberal way?
I think Obama is less the ardent Liberal we would have hoped for and more the pragmatic Democrat who sees government as as series of compromises for the general betterment of society. From a purely selfish point of view I wanted Obama to go in and kick the Repbus to the curb and force them kicking and screaming out of the darkness of ignorance. Sadly they are more tenacious than probably anyone expected. Their ability to say no just to do damage to the president at the cost of the country is simply stunning.
My hope is for a Dem tsunami in 2012 and a re-invigorated Liberal Dem party...once can always dream.