Running On Results, With an Explanation . . .

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:21:51 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

It is bizarre to me that Matt Yglesias thinks this argument makes any POLITICAL sense:

I feel like a lot of highly perceptive skilled writers tend to kind of see the problem and then take their eye off the ball. There’s obstructionism in Congress, not all of it from Republicans. And excuses don’t matter, results do. Therefore, what you need to do is devise a strategy designed to produce the best possible results given the constraints.

(Emphasis supplied.) If Obama follows THIS advice, he might as well start packing his bags. The results have stunk and will stink some more through November 2012. Someone needs to be blamed for the bad results. You can't do that if you don't point out what YOUR best plan is and who is stopping you from doing it. Hell, even the "President is powerless" is a better argument than this one. As Atrios responds:

The point is that what's been on the table so far isn't going to actually achieve results, if by results we mean "lowering unemployment by Nov. 2012" instead of "passing some crap through Congress that at best won't do much." [. . .] I do tend to think if you aren't going to have any results then messaging is all you have left.

(Emphasis supplied.) We've pretty much reached the "messaging is all we have left" stage.

< Monday Morning Open Thread | Monday Afternoon Open Thread >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Running On Results, With an Explanation . . . | 47 comments (47 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

And the message is written in rocks... (5.00 / 4) (#2)
by Dadler on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:31:01 PM EST

...spelled out in large letters across the sand, left there by an untold number of castaways. The message reads "S.O.S."

Amazing how, in a supposedly free country, an entire class of relatively educated people can have negative imaginative abilities. It's as if these folks were never even TAUGHT how to imagine.

This congress isn't (5.00 / 4) (#3)
by jeffinalabama on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:31:32 PM EST

the "Do Nothing" congress Truman faced. Truman used the veto to kill a lot of craptabulous legislation from that congress, then castigated them, with cause, for the junk they submitted.

The current president has made nice and has facilitated bad bargains. Before this congress, he made nice and developed a poor stimulus and a weak health insurance reform bill that had been compromised in advance-- see drug companies, for example.

Obama has not been a succesful president. He has been at best mediocre in domestic policy. He has hesitated time and again in foreign policy, also.

Worst ever? no. However, he has not been nearly as effective as he needed to be. He has surrounded himself with poor advisors, and he has courted conservative senators to lead his initiatives.

So should we expect a change? Will he suddenly, like the fictional wife abuser, say, "I'll never do it aqgain?"

He still surrounds himself with some of the worst democrats of Chicago 2011, and some of the worst economists of this period, also.

Two names, Mr. President, that you ought to know and use: Stiglitz and Krugman. Not the Chicago school supply siders or bankster buddies.

Economically, in terms of what is needed... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by Dadler on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 05:27:59 PM EST

...he is verging on worst of territory quickly. When you have to endure the worst economic heat a nation has faced in seventy plus years (and much that is truly unprecedented in its awfulness), the kitchen isn't gonna LET you get out. And Obama is still looking for canned goods in the cutlery drawer.

And btw, welcome back, got your email, sent you one in return with some writing links. Peace.


In general (5.00 / 4) (#29)
by jondee on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 06:01:59 PM EST

we probably have the worst, most mendacious, power elite in this country since the MFing Golden Horde was riding roughshod over Asia. Worse than the days of the robber barons, imo.

At least in Filmore's time the gentry in this country still read Cicero, Shakespeare, and Goethe; now these predatory, go-for-the-throat, barbarians seem to think that all one needs to know is Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and one's own portfolio. And "the money is always right" types, some of whom know better, are too afraid to ever contradict them.


: I'm not quite ready... (none / 0) (#35)
by Dadler on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 06:30:07 PM EST

...to yearn for a 19th century gentry just yet, but I agree this new crop of robber barons is insidiously disconnected from the less cannibalistic aspects of existence.

Here's two more names (3.50 / 2) (#11)
by Towanda on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:58:09 PM EST

for which he can be grateful: Harding. Fillmore.

Without them and Buchanan and a few more at the bottom of the list, Obama would have to worry about that "worst president" list.

I know that you as a historian will appreciate that your comment reminds me of a title for a commissioned history that a friend of mine was writing and wanted to suggest: Striving Toward Mediocrity.

As the friend wanted to keep the client, he kept the suggested title to himself. So it remains unclaimed for use by Obama biographers.


: Mediocrity might be a high point (5.00 / 2) (#33)
by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 06:17:18 PM EST

for this Administration when all is said and done.
"Looking for the Lowest Common Denominator That Is Not Truly Common" might be a better book title.
Or maybe...
"The Most Uncommon Common Denominator" could work.
Catering exclusively to the top 1% is not what I would call "common".
What so many misguided people are really saying here is that they think that this Administration and the Democratic Party should go for legislation that will be destructive to this democracy just because they might be able to pass the legislation. Those kinds of notches in one's belt will eventually have ones pants coming down around their ankles.

"messaging is all we have left" (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by The Addams Family on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:37:04 PM EST

what do you mean, "we," kemosabe?

He means the "Roe v. Wade" message (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by Towanda on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:40:34 PM EST

from what I've seen here. That's about all that the Dems have got. And that means they're toast.


Obama would compromise on (5.00 / 2) (#10)
by jeffinalabama on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:51:04 PM EST

Roe, I think. After all, HE can't get pregnant.


There are those (none / 0) (#9)
by jbindc on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:45:30 PM EST

even here, who keep screaming "SUPREME COURT NOMINATIONS!!"

Of course, what they keep failing to understand is that Obama only got two picks in his first term because the justices themselves decide when to go, barring death or incapacitation, of course.

But if a Republican is elected, do you think Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, or Sotamayor will leave, barring catastrophic circumstances? They would rather have their fingernails ripped out.

Of course, no one can predict those circumstances, but you know what? That goes for ALL the justices - not just those on the liberal wing.


What nonsense (none / 0) (#25)
by Politalkix on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 05:09:07 PM EST

jbindc wrote "Of course, no one can predict those circumstances, but you know what? That goes for ALL the justices - not just those on the liberal wing."

Ofcourse, we do not want Scalia and Kennedy seeking retirements during a Republican Presidency and the SC getting rejuvenated by two more 40 year old conservative justices.
If Kerry was President, John Roberts would not be chief Justice and we could also be looking forward to the day when Sandra Day O'Connor could be replaced. Because Thurgood Marshall could not continue, we have Clarence Thomas.


: The nonsense is (none / 0) (#44)
by jbindc on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 07:24:04 AM EST

your comment. My point was that we cannot foresee health issues or the like for ANY justice - Scalia is 75 and Thomas is in his 60s.
And the ONLY reason the Court has 2 new members is because they chose to retire under a Democratic administrations.
[And if you think Clarence Thomas is here only because of George Bush, well, you might want to look at the help he had from the current Vice President - a Democrat, if you don't remember].
As to gyrfalcon's point - 8 years for Ginsburg doesn't matter because we won't have a Democrat in the WH that long. If Obama happens to win re-election, there won't be a Dem in 2016. If Ginsburg feels her health can't last 4 years under a Republican president, she will go before Obama leaves office and he has time to appoint someone else. Justices watch polls too.

Ginsburg almost certainly (none / 0) (#40)
by gyrfalcon on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 02:43:35 AM EST

can't hang on another four years, never mind eight.


Seems Obama would prefer to run (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by MO Blue on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:40:15 PM EST

on his "Grand Bargain" which according to reports is going to be part and parcel of his "job plan." Give me my "Grand Bargain" which includes cuts to domestic and safety net programs as well as lower marginal tax rates for corporations and the upper brackets and the confidence fairie will come out of hiding and provide jobs.

Obama has already called for an extension of a payroll tax cut that expires at the end of the year and he wants to continue jobless benefits. Aides are considering other measures, including tax incentives for businesses to hire and direct infusions of government money into construction projects. The president has said he intends to call for additional long-term deficit reduction to help pay for the short-term spending his proposals would require. link

In other words...running on empty. (5.00 / 7) (#7)
by Anne on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:42:11 PM EST

Results have always mattered, until Democrats blinded with Obama-love decided to see how many reasons they could come up with for why (1) it's not Obama's fault, (2) he's really powerless to do anything, (3) it's a head-fake, and when all else fails, (4) no matter what, the other guys are worse.

You put a Republican name on the Obama administration, and these same cheerleaders would have burst into flames from the heat of their own criticism.

I'm sick of the enablers, I really am.

this is indisputable (5.00 / 3) (#12)
by The Addams Family on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:58:19 PM EST

the proof is that so many of the cheerleaders did burst into flames when these policies (& in some cases, their somewhat milder versions) were marketed under the Bush/Cheney brand


I can see the messaging now (5.00 / 2) (#13)
by MO Blue on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:02:41 PM EST

Obama: It is true that Social Security could have paid out 100% of benefits until at least 2037 without making any changes but I decided to cut the benefits now so that they won't have to be cut sometime in the distant future. Oh, and BTW did I mention that we cut the marginal tax rate on corporations and the top bracket from 35% down to 23% (or 29%).

This should give everyone a warm (5.00 / 2) (#39)
by MO Blue on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 09:45:57 PM EST

and fuzzy feeling.

Next week Obama said he plans to lay out "a series of steps that Congress can take immediately" as part of "our urgent mission" to jumpstart the economy.
The plan, he said, will be full of "bipartisan ideas that everyone can support." TPM

: Oh, golly gee (none / 0) (#41)
by gyrfalcon on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 02:44:59 AM EST

I can hardly wait!

This (5.00 / 3) (#17)
by jbindc on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:09:31 PM EST

A former Massachusetts governor who has spent four years in office and ten years running for something else, and whose only decisive campaign statement to date has been to tell voters that indeed, corporations are people, too.

Wouldn't be a good argument, since in 2008 we had the junior Senator from Illinois, who spent 2 of the 4 years he was in the Senate, running for something else, and whose only decisive campaign statement at that time was to tell voters that indeed, Yes, We Can.

Whose campaign statement (5.00 / 3) (#20)
by MO Blue on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:16:07 PM EST

was "Yes, We Can" and since taking office most consistent and decisive statement has been "No, We Can't."


jbindc's unshakeable Romney love (1.00 / 1) (#28)
by Politalkix on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 05:49:51 PM EST

is amusing. Romney wants workers to pay their own unemployment benefits. He wants Bush Tax cuts to be made permanent. link

Romney may force workers to save in private unemployment savings account from which the rich can steal but he sure gets a lot of love from a number of people (not just jbindc) in this blog.


How does pointing out the flaw ... (5.00 / 5) (#38)
by Yman on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 09:40:06 PM EST

... in the Romney/lack of experience argument by comparing it to Obama's lack of experience equate to "Romney love"? Who are all these unnamed people on TL with "love" for Romney?

Ridiculous.


: Logic (none / 0) (#45)
by jbindc on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 07:26:38 AM EST

Is lost on some people, apparently.
Politakix found me out. Romeny in 2012 - Go Mitt!

Is this (none / 0) (#34)
by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 06:23:12 PM EST

the sick choice we're going to be put up to vote on in '12? One who wants to do all this stuff and another one while saying he doesn't want it to happen then does nothing to stop it or passively aggressively enables it?


THat's what Romey says he (none / 0) (#42)
by gyrfalcon on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 02:46:23 AM EST

wants this week.


No, Matt (5.00 / 3) (#18)
by ruffian on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:14:28 PM EST

Therefore, what you need to do is devise a strategy designed to produce the best possible results given the constraints.

What you need to do is ignore the constraints while you are coming up with your policy, and address the obstructionists loudly and publicly as they arise. Then maybe they go away as people get the idea.

Missed the chance to try that in 2009. It is quite possibly too late.

Stop that crazy talk (none / 0) (#19)
by jbindc on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:16:06 PM EST

That's not how PPUS works!


: I know, it is so divisive! (none / 0) (#23)
by ruffian on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:34:28 PM EST

Much better to unite around cr*p policy!

Can't think what the message (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by oculus on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:17:04 PM EST

is.

Lessor Of Two Evils! LOTE !! LOTE !!! LOTE!!!! (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by seabos84 on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:33:27 PM EST

Supreme Court Roving Wading Floundering ... I mean I'll appoint and vote for right wingers ...

opps.

LOTE LOTE LOTE LOTE !!!!!

+++++
Dear 0bummer & DLC Third Way Blue Dog New Dem Neo Lib Sell Outs -

please send me the hundreds of millions you'll waste on messaging and CON$ultant$ next year - I've got better ways to peee that money away than by enabling the same ol tried and true sell outs & their lavish lifestyles.

(I might put it all on #42 on a roulette wheel - minus an appropriate CON$ultant fee, of course)

r. murphy
seattle.

Austan Goolsbee ... (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Robot Porter on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 05:05:03 PM EST

that "debating champ" was on Sean Hannity recently. And he blamed the poor jobs numbers on, among other things, the Washington D.C. earthquake.

Huh?!?

Patently absurd, of course.

But then I realized something: This administration doesn't have any intention of actually doing anything on jobs. But they are interested in creating propaganda suggesting they have done something. From that perspective, anything that eats up news cycles is a hindrance.

Sadly, I don't think Goolsbee knows the difference between creating jobs and creating the impression you've created jobs. In his world the unemployed aren't a real thing. They're as mythical a construct as bigfoot. Perhaps more mythical.

Stuff like that makes me fairly (5.00 / 3) (#32)
by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 06:14:48 PM EST

certain that Austan Goolsbee is mostly a damned idiot


Stuff he said in the campaign (5.00 / 2) (#36)
by Towanda on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 07:23:56 PM EST

had me researching the school of economic thought at the U of Chicago -- and that was a major factor that convinced me then that Obama was relying on a lot of damned idiots, even before Geithner became the proof.


I wish more people would do some (5.00 / 1) (#46)
by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 08:33:54 AM EST

research of the school of thought coming out of the U of Chicago, better understand the ongoing arguments between what has been termed the freshwater and saltwater, and also become aware of who at other Universities embrace the Chicago School's often inhumane form of economic practices.

Because some highly thought of Economics Professors are being paid huge sums of money to write certain papers looking favorably on certain practices as well, the teaching of college level economics itself has now become infected, dishonest, full of bull$hit. Sort of like what they did with the MBA programs at first. They managed to make an MBA just about worthless too right after it was literally golden :)


MT (none / 0) (#47)
by jbindc on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 10:03:18 AM EST

I've been meaning to ask you and maybe I missed it - what is your background? You are so knowledgable about finance...I do love reading your comments. :)


: I studied business (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 12:30:02 PM EST

which was so boring and dry and not nearly as sexy as what it became a little bit later on. But my whole family has always been small business owners and encouraged being self made and a little fearless. The best money usually does go to the risk taking entrepreneur.
My grandfather was who was very knowledgeable about the ebb and flow of an economy. He always challenged me to think ahead, beyond what is happening right in front of me where investing is concerned too. You have to understand the system to know what is a good investment, and the lack of transparency and observance of the rule of law is making it very difficult for people to be able to do those things for themselves now.
My grandfather was a small business owner, as was his father who owned the Mercantile store in Edison CO. He had five brothers...three who also became small business owners as well. All different businesses too, but all very successful. You find a niche (something you enjoy doing), you expand, you advertise and market, you observe and experiment. I was taught to be a member of the community though as well, that that is most important and makes getting up every morning and doing the same thing again rewarding. I was not taught to hunt my community or prey upon my customers....I need my community and my customers, they feed me.
Before I married and had Joshua I started a landscaping company in my late 20's, and everything that I experienced doing that reaffirmed what my grandfather taught me. Be responsible and dependable and provide good service and good products and your chances can be very good, it will be tough going during the early years though...and it was in a way. I made enough money to live alright, but it was consistency and dedication that allowed there to be enough money to buy trenchers and diesel trucks and trailers for hauling so that bigger better jobs could be bid on and pay received from. I did well, and sold my half when my engagement to my partner failed miserably :)
I get to live vicariously through my daughter's fiancee right now. He had just started a landscaping company when he and my daughter began dating. He's much younger than I was when I started, and he has extremely good natural abilities where outdoor creating and building comes into play. He built a privacy fence for me last year which we photographed and use for advertisement. He did a really really damn good job. He also built my stone beds in front of the house. He is always busy busy busy too, so full of energy. He is going to be a much bigger success, in ten years at this rate I can't even imagine where he will be. It is nice that someone actually needs something I have though, like how to figure your taxes, do payroll and document your own earnings. All things that are sort of worthless outside of being a small business owner.
When my husband retires, we are batting around a few ideas for something to do together.

And I almost forgot this (5.00 / 2) (#31)
by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 06:13:13 PM EST

In the sky, there is no distinction of east and west; people create distinctions out of their own minds and then believe them to be true.

(Buddha)

Not that anybody is all touchy feely about Buddha like I am, but there's some truth in that statement.

: Not a Buddhist, but (5.00 / 2) (#43)
by gyrfalcon on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 02:48:36 AM EST

I've never heard of anything he said that wasn't true.

Shall I call the night porter, then? (none / 0) (#1)
by andgarden on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:30:56 PM EST

Sorry, but he was laid off (5.00 / 7) (#8)
by Towanda on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 03:43:08 PM EST

-- however, here's a copy of the property management company's annual report that you can carry for yourself to see how our profits have soared for our investors.


: But the Robot Porter ... (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by Robot Porter on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 05:16:25 PM EST

is still around.
;)

Yglesias' comment (none / 0) (#15)
by lilburro on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:06:44 PM EST

makes no sense unless he thinks the Obama Administration has some secret, super-effective policy up their sleeve. Which doesn't seem to be the case.

well, this one is true (none / 0) (#16)
by The Addams Family on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 04:07:38 PM EST

A former Pennsylvania senator who claims that the GLBT comunity is conducting a jihad against his candidacy

& thank goodness for the jihad!

Google Santorum & note the first link that comes up . . .

When you write stuff like this (none / 0) (#30)
by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 06:06:45 PM EST

It makes me like you too much

To promise is most courtly and fashionable (none / 0) (#37)
by seabos84 on Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 08:30:54 PM EST

Painter:
Good as the best. Promising is the very air o' the time:
it opens the eyes of expectation:
performance is ever the duller for his act;
and, but in the plainer and simpler kind of people, the deed of saying is quite out of use.

To promise is most courtly and fashionable:
performance is a kind of will or testament which argues a great sickness in his judgment that makes it.

(TIMON comes from his cave, behind)

TIMON: (Aside)
Excellent workman! thou canst not paint a man so bad as is thyself.

+++++

this play has been written.

rmm.