The Political Pendulum

After the 2008 election Democrats were on a high.    President Barack Obama had been elected as the first black President, the Democrats controlled both the Senate and the House, and demographics seemed to indicate that if anything, their future  was brighter than ever.   President Bush left office as one of the least popular Presidents in history, being blamed for a dubious war in Iraq and an economic crisis that hurled the US into recession.

Yet the pendulum swung.   The depth and severity of the recession proved greater than the Obama White House had anticipated, and with the Democrats in control of government they were blamed for anything that went wrong.   After health care reform was pushed through just barely, yielding a compromise that angered conservatives and many liberals alike, President Obama found the honey moon over.   The tea party movement achieved amazing success at shaping the political discourse, and a new narrative took hold.

This narrative said that President Obama’s policies were hindering the recovery, that the stimulus was a waste of money and a failure, and that the raw politicking of the health care deal showed the shady side of Democratic politics.    Republicans said the real solution to the problems the country faces is smaller government and fiscal conservatism.   The hope and change promised by the Democrats was just more tax and spend — more government programs.

In 2010 the GOP achieved dramatic success, something unexpected after two election cycles dominated by the Democrats.   Without the drag of the Iraq war and with President Obama “owning” the economy (even though neither he nor Bush ever could control it) the public swung right.   Some of it was fear that change was going too fast; others thought the Democrats simply moved farther and faster than the public wanted.  President Obama’s approval ratings dropped down below 50%.

Yet even as the Republicans start to lick their chops over electoral prospects in 2012, the pendulum may be swinging again.   The President’s approval ratings are still bad, but they are picking up slightly.   Don’t forget, President Clinton had 40% approval in early 1995, and Reagan dropped to 38% for awhile in 1983.   President Obama is now at about 43%.

The mood seems to be changing.  E J Dionne notes this “narrative change,” citing Paul Ryan’s somewhat bitter speech to the Heritage Foundation as evidence that Republicans recognize that the argument is slipping away from them.   Occupy Wall Street has shown itself more popular and resilient than anyone expected, and the efforts to paint them as a bunch of spoiled hippies and malcontents has failed.     President Obama’s “new populism” is hitting a chord.   Americans don’t want massive redistribution and high taxes, but the idea that the system is unbalanced in favor of the wealthy is gaining traction.

Moreover, the Republican party doesn’t seem to have a clear leader, and their primaries have been dominated by sometimes extreme rhetoric that scares independents.   Herman Cain wants an abortion ban with no exceptions, not even for rape and incest.   That kind of talk scares people.   Michelle Bachmann’s call to bring taxes back to the level they were under Ronald Reagan is illustrative.    Taxes were much higher under Reagan than they are now; as she had to retreat from that statement it reinforced the idea that Reagan would be far too liberal for today’s GOP.    The narrative of an extremist Republican party is building.   Rick Perry’s assault on social security addsto that as the GOP Presidential field tries to capture the tea party electorate that vote in early primaries.

Mitt Romney should be a strong candidate.  He is clearly a moderate who shouldn’t scare anyone, but his Mormonism and moderation might actually decrease conservative enthusiasm in 2012.   He’s benefited from the turmoil in the GOP field, but the Republican party has lost control of the conversation.   Instead of Reaganesque optimism the tune from the right is increasingly antagonistic.

Meanwhile, Democrats in the House start whispering that there are a lot of vulnerable Republicans, especially first termers, who are having trouble raising money and whose ideological voting records don’t play well at home.    All Democrats expect gains in 2012; the idea of winning back the House is not as far fetched as it used to be.

Right now the conventional wisdom remains that President Obama is, if not the underdog, in a difficult position heading into the re-election fight.   But at this point in 2009, when Obama was still above 50% in approval, few people realized that the pendulum had already started a decisive swing away from the Democrats and towards the Republicans.

It’s still too early to know for sure if the pendulum is swinging back in the Democrat’s direction.   Obama is getting kudos for success in Libya, he announced the end of the Iraq war, and there may be an end in Afghanistan sooner than people expect.   The economic news has become slightly more optimistic.    Occupy Wall Street has stolen the attention that the tea party used to enjoy and has spread across the country, gaining a lot of support from Iraq veterans.    In states like Ohio, Wisconsin and even here in Maine conservative causes have led to dissatisfaction — ballot initiatives in both Ohio and Maine might be very telling about the way the mood is changing (Ohio’s involves public labor unions, Maine’s is an effort to undo Republican legislation removing same day voting registration).

It feels like the pendulum has switched directions.   It feels like 2012 could be for the Democrats what 2010 was for the Republicans.   It feels like Obama may join Presidents Clinton and Reagan in the catagory of having their political obituaries written too soon.   Time will tell — there is still a lot that could go right or wrong for both parties.     The good news about the political pendulum is that if you’re on the losing side of an election, it won’t be that way forever.   The bad news is that if you’re on the winning side the same applies.

Advertisements
  1. #1 by Black Flag® on October 31, 2011 - 16:40

    As all Statists, you believe you can find a messiah in the providers of legitimized violence to raise your petty life into a status of great wealth and joy.

    You are endlessly disappointed, but that never distracts you from your search.

    • #2 by Scott Erb on October 31, 2011 - 16:49

      You’re the one who seems a tad bitter and disappointed! I don’t need a messiah or faith in some ideology. I love life through the living of each day. Try it, it works!

      • #3 by Black Flag® on October 31, 2011 - 17:13

        Scott,

        Oh I do.

        I don’t look at other people’s wallets to judge my happiness

  2. #4 by Scott Erb on October 31, 2011 - 17:17

    Definitely — comparison to others is dangerous. There will always be people who do better or worse at everything. Such comparisons only make happiness harder to achieve. We agree on something.

  3. #5 by Alan Scott on October 31, 2011 - 22:13

    Scott ,

    ” Definitely — comparison to others is dangerous. There will always be people who do better or worse at everything. Such comparisons only make happiness harder to achieve. We agree on something. ”

    If only you could teach that philosophy to the Class Warrior in Chief and his henchmen and henchwomen , imagine the era of peace and prosperity that you would usher in .

  4. #6 by Jeff Lees on November 2, 2011 - 01:24

    Optimistically, I like to think of this “pendulum swing” as finally breaking away from the grip that the right has had on this country since the 1980s. The Bush era was the when the veil of legitimacy for the right’s cultural movement was lost, and the Tea Party was the last desperate gasp of air for an otherwise drowning cultural shirt. Again, optimistic, but I’d like my children to be raised in an era progress, not regression like the one I was raised in. As a liberal, sometimes I feel like the conservative in the conversations I have. I’m the one that wants to go BACK to the days where workers had union representation, pensions, and living wages. I’m the one who wants to go BACK to the days when the rich paid their fair share, and when the middle class was growing. But nonetheless, let’s hope that we’re on the precipice of a cultural shirt towards the left!

  5. #7 by Alan Scott on November 2, 2011 - 02:41

    Jeff Lees ,

    You are misinterpreting why the good old days were good. They peaked in 1971, when a high school drop out could get a high paying job and support a large family comfortably. You can bring back union representation and beggaring the rich, and you still will never get those times back .

  1. Adieu, Tea Party? « World in Motion
  2. GOP Message Failure « World in Motion

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: