As I said yesterday, Obama again showed us that they don't come any funnier than him. Larry Wilmore certainly failed to match him.
At this point we have a good idea of where things are going. Americans overwhelmingly expect Hillary-Trump according to a new poll.
But we still have to go through the process though we know where it ends up. Hillary is going to be the Democratic nominee. Donald Trump is going to be the GOP nominee.
Hillary Clinton is then going to beat Donald Trump very soundly. The betting market has her with close to 75 percent with him at almost 25 percent.
https://electionbettingodds.com/week.html
Sam Wang though has her chances of beating Trump at 91 percent.
http://election.princeton.edu/2016/05/01/what-do-head-to-head-general-election-polls-tell-us-about-november/
Because she is the likely next POTUS, you see a new anti Hillary meme forming. Sure, she'll probably win. But her Presidency won't be successful.
Paul Waldman is already looking past her beating Trump to worry she won't do much as President. She'll be like Obama minus the accomplishments.
"Barack Obama's presidency, we can all agree, has been anything but easy. It's full of real, even monumental accomplishments, but for every victory there has been a defeat, for every moment of triumph a long stretch of frustration. And because Obama's remarkable 2008 campaign was so inspiring, accompanied by so much hope and belief in transformation, the long hard slog of governing has been particularly painful for liberals. That pain has been the engine driving the Bernie Sanders campaign forward, as many on the left have, somewhat ironically, come to believe that the promise of Obama's presidency could be fulfilled by a 74-year-old Jewish socialist possessing a fraction of Obama's charisma and political skill."
But if you think the Obama years were frustrating, just you wait for the Hillary Clinton presidency.
At this point we have a good idea of where things are going. Americans overwhelmingly expect Hillary-Trump according to a new poll.
But we still have to go through the process though we know where it ends up. Hillary is going to be the Democratic nominee. Donald Trump is going to be the GOP nominee.
Hillary Clinton is then going to beat Donald Trump very soundly. The betting market has her with close to 75 percent with him at almost 25 percent.
https://electionbettingodds.com/week.html
Sam Wang though has her chances of beating Trump at 91 percent.
http://election.princeton.edu/2016/05/01/what-do-head-to-head-general-election-polls-tell-us-about-november/
Because she is the likely next POTUS, you see a new anti Hillary meme forming. Sure, she'll probably win. But her Presidency won't be successful.
Paul Waldman is already looking past her beating Trump to worry she won't do much as President. She'll be like Obama minus the accomplishments.
"Barack Obama's presidency, we can all agree, has been anything but easy. It's full of real, even monumental accomplishments, but for every victory there has been a defeat, for every moment of triumph a long stretch of frustration. And because Obama's remarkable 2008 campaign was so inspiring, accompanied by so much hope and belief in transformation, the long hard slog of governing has been particularly painful for liberals. That pain has been the engine driving the Bernie Sanders campaign forward, as many on the left have, somewhat ironically, come to believe that the promise of Obama's presidency could be fulfilled by a 74-year-old Jewish socialist possessing a fraction of Obama's charisma and political skill."
But if you think the Obama years were frustrating, just you wait for the Hillary Clinton presidency.
http://prospect.org/article/why-hillary-clinton-may-be-doomed-repeat-obama-presidency
For goodness sakes. Can't the woman even enjoy her victories-and let us, her fans enjoy them-before we have to get hyper bearish about her prospects?
"Let's start by remembering what happened when Obama took office in January 2009. Literally on the day of his inauguration, key congressional Republicans gathered for dinner in a Washington restaurant and decided on their strategy for the coming years: total and complete opposition to anything and everything the new president wanted to do, to deny him any legislative victories and make it more likely that they would take back power."
"As those Republicans (particularly Mitch McConnell) shrewdly understood, partisan fights are seen by an inattentive public as nothing more than "Washington" squabbling, and the only one likely to be punished for them is the president, whether he's to blame or not. So it was that Republicans gained sweeping victories in the off-year elections of 2010 and 2014, giving them the institutional tools to stop Obama's agenda from moving forward."
I get the point. But if anything, for once, I think Scott Sumner's analysis is more on point. The trouble is that Waldman is assuming the GOP of 2009 and 2017 will be identical. Sumner suggests it won't be. For a number of reasons, I think this is true.
"Harding, You said:
“The GOP is the party of obstruction; it will refuse any minimum wage increase until a Republican is in office as President.”
"You have no imagination. They will be a chastened party in 2017, totally humiliated, and they’ll go along with Hillary. She’ll throw a bone like corporate tax reform (which she supports anyway.) Romney has already caved on the minimum wage; trust me the GOP will cave in 2017. The political mood of the country will be TOTALLY different from today, that’s always what happens after a blowout. In 1981, frightened Democratic Congressmen often voted for Reagan’s spending cuts."
"The interesting question will be whether the Fed keeps targeting inflation at 2%, as the minimum wage rises to $12."
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/04/scott-sumner-predicts-12-national.html
He argues that the GOP in 2017 will be Germany after WWII as opposed to after WWI.
"As those Republicans (particularly Mitch McConnell) shrewdly understood, partisan fights are seen by an inattentive public as nothing more than "Washington" squabbling, and the only one likely to be punished for them is the president, whether he's to blame or not. So it was that Republicans gained sweeping victories in the off-year elections of 2010 and 2014, giving them the institutional tools to stop Obama's agenda from moving forward."
I get the point. But if anything, for once, I think Scott Sumner's analysis is more on point. The trouble is that Waldman is assuming the GOP of 2009 and 2017 will be identical. Sumner suggests it won't be. For a number of reasons, I think this is true.
"Harding, You said:
“The GOP is the party of obstruction; it will refuse any minimum wage increase until a Republican is in office as President.”
"You have no imagination. They will be a chastened party in 2017, totally humiliated, and they’ll go along with Hillary. She’ll throw a bone like corporate tax reform (which she supports anyway.) Romney has already caved on the minimum wage; trust me the GOP will cave in 2017. The political mood of the country will be TOTALLY different from today, that’s always what happens after a blowout. In 1981, frightened Democratic Congressmen often voted for Reagan’s spending cuts."
"The interesting question will be whether the Fed keeps targeting inflation at 2%, as the minimum wage rises to $12."
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/04/scott-sumner-predicts-12-national.html
He argues that the GOP in 2017 will be Germany after WWII as opposed to after WWI.
I think this will be proven true. They will be chastened. Trump will drag them down to some losses in Congress. The party itself will become more splintered and indecisive.
With Hillary's political skills-something Obama by his own admission had less taste for-she may well get some major things done.
Here is another bearish piece on Hillary's Presidency.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/04/how-hillary-could-win-the-electionand-lose-the-country-213852
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/04/how-hillary-could-win-the-electionand-lose-the-country-213852
Politico argues Hillary is not the right choice for a country that wants the radical change of Trump and Bernie. Then why is she creaming both of them in votes?
Her success shows that not all of us are driven by pure fear and anger. That's what her mandate will be.
No comments:
Post a Comment