A good issue for Obama?
January 26th 2010 09:36
Since the Massachusetts wake-up call, Obama has been trying to morph himself into the king of the populists. Apparently, he has determined that he needs to do something for the everyman who took a charge as Obama tried to drive to the hoop for a health-care layup. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em, right?
Obama's initial populist issue appears to be an attack on the biggest banks. If Obama gins up some real anger on this issue, it could work out well for him. Those groups aren't popular with the American people right now. While average folks suffer under the burdensome recession, the bankers are making out like bandits. They nearly collapsed the economy with their awful decision-making and they reached the precipice of insolvency. With huge injections of taxpayer dollars, though, they have rebounded and are making record profits. As a result, they are handing out record bonuses. Do you think someone on Main Street who can't get a job will be thrilled with a taxpayer-buoyed bank handing out seven-figure bonuses? No, I don't think so, either. If Obama can take some kind of restrictive or even punitive measures (e.g., regulations or high taxes on banker bonuses) against the irresponsible and, apparently, ungrateful banks, he could curry some favor with the average man on the street.
This particular issue can be especially rewarding for Obama if the GOP stands against any efforts he takes. The GOP has always been in favor of less regulation and they are largely viewed as being cozier with Wall Street than the Dems. If Obama tries to crack down on the banks and the GOP stands up to defend huge bank bonuses, it will very quickly make the GOP -- and not the Dems -- appear tone-deaf and out of touch. That could be a win for Obama and it could knock the GOP down a few pegs just as they're starting to get their footing.
It all sounds great for the Dems, right? Not exactly. Obama can act tough against the banks, but he has a credibility gap. Folks will remember that he funneled money to the banks and to Wall Street against the wishes of the American people. That was just last year, so I doubt folks will forget that it happened. An about-face now may not be very believable. Also, Obama has surrounded himself with some suspect financial advisors. Robert Rubin is the former director of Citigroup, one of the banks that would've gone under without taxpayer assistance. Lawrence Summers is a trusted Obama advisor. Mr. Summers was the architect of the Wall Street deregulation that caused a lot of the problems we have today. Finally, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is the tax cheat who, to this day, seems in way over his head. Also, Geithner is thought to have been particularly close to Wall Street execs when he was with the NY Fed. While Obama is surrounded by these advisors, his credibility is questionable -- to say the least.
Will Obama get tough on the big banks -- or is this just more of his empty rhetoric? Perhaps he is just playing politics by putting the GOP into a difficult position on an issue where their views are out of step with the voting public? We'll see if he's serious about this. If he plays his cards right, though, he could use this issue to blunt the criticism that he has done everything for Wall Street and very little for Main Street. If he can pull that off, he may be able to build up a small amount of capital with some of the folks carrying pitchforks on the White House lawn.
Obama's initial populist issue appears to be an attack on the biggest banks. If Obama gins up some real anger on this issue, it could work out well for him. Those groups aren't popular with the American people right now. While average folks suffer under the burdensome recession, the bankers are making out like bandits. They nearly collapsed the economy with their awful decision-making and they reached the precipice of insolvency. With huge injections of taxpayer dollars, though, they have rebounded and are making record profits. As a result, they are handing out record bonuses. Do you think someone on Main Street who can't get a job will be thrilled with a taxpayer-buoyed bank handing out seven-figure bonuses? No, I don't think so, either. If Obama can take some kind of restrictive or even punitive measures (e.g., regulations or high taxes on banker bonuses) against the irresponsible and, apparently, ungrateful banks, he could curry some favor with the average man on the street.
This particular issue can be especially rewarding for Obama if the GOP stands against any efforts he takes. The GOP has always been in favor of less regulation and they are largely viewed as being cozier with Wall Street than the Dems. If Obama tries to crack down on the banks and the GOP stands up to defend huge bank bonuses, it will very quickly make the GOP -- and not the Dems -- appear tone-deaf and out of touch. That could be a win for Obama and it could knock the GOP down a few pegs just as they're starting to get their footing.
It all sounds great for the Dems, right? Not exactly. Obama can act tough against the banks, but he has a credibility gap. Folks will remember that he funneled money to the banks and to Wall Street against the wishes of the American people. That was just last year, so I doubt folks will forget that it happened. An about-face now may not be very believable. Also, Obama has surrounded himself with some suspect financial advisors. Robert Rubin is the former director of Citigroup, one of the banks that would've gone under without taxpayer assistance. Lawrence Summers is a trusted Obama advisor. Mr. Summers was the architect of the Wall Street deregulation that caused a lot of the problems we have today. Finally, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is the tax cheat who, to this day, seems in way over his head. Also, Geithner is thought to have been particularly close to Wall Street execs when he was with the NY Fed. While Obama is surrounded by these advisors, his credibility is questionable -- to say the least.
Will Obama get tough on the big banks -- or is this just more of his empty rhetoric? Perhaps he is just playing politics by putting the GOP into a difficult position on an issue where their views are out of step with the voting public? We'll see if he's serious about this. If he plays his cards right, though, he could use this issue to blunt the criticism that he has done everything for Wall Street and very little for Main Street. If he can pull that off, he may be able to build up a small amount of capital with some of the folks carrying pitchforks on the White House lawn.
| 37 |
| Vote |
Comment by Lester Caudill
Round Politics
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate