What got me here was actually partly something that Scott Sumner, of all people, have said. He argued in an exchange with Tom Brown's buddy E. Harding that in 2017 the GOP will cave on the MW-he pointed out that Romney has already caved on the MW.
E. Harding argued that the GOP in 2017 will do what they did in 2009-obstruct everything the Democrat President tries to do.
Sumner argues that, to the contrary, the GOP in 2017 will be a chastened party after Trump. They will be Germany post WWII not Germany post WWI.
This is a good insight by Sumner. I think it may well be the case.
Sumner is not always blessed with great insight: as he admits he failed to believe Trump could win the GOP nomination when me and Krugman already knew that this was very possible.
But this is an insight I haven't seen elsewhere.
I think Sumner is right here. The party is going to have a terrible Trump hangover.
1. It's natural to imagine the GOP will offer the same scorched earth opposition to a Hillary Administration they offered to Obama in 2009 or her husband in 1993. But the Trump Effect will be present this time.
In the Obama years, the one thing that unified the party was total opposition to all things Obama. But in the long term, a party unified only in what it opposes is no party at all as we've seen starting with the problem they had last year in even selecting a House Speaker.
2. Paul Ryan.
The failure to confirm Kevin McCarthy was the first clear sign that the GOP was no longer really a party at all, but rather a group of warring factions.
However, I have said all along that I think Ryan was a good choice. If anyone can lead the GOP in a better direction it might be Ryan.
No, I don't agree with him on much of anything ideologically. I agree with Krugman's mockery of Ryan's budgets and his plan to block grant Medicare.
But Ryan at least has the attributes of an actual leader. And this brings me to another reason I think Hillary might get a few things done in 2017: Ryan will see that the sort of scorched earth opposition the GOP offered Obama is not sustainable and has proven to be completely self-defeating.
He may well decide that the GOP has to at least work with Hillary and the Dems where agreement is possible.
The big criticism of the GOP during the Obama years has been that their total opposition to him has been so cynical: even things that they agreed on they refused to do.
On the MW, why not at least take a page out of the Sumner playbook and offer an higher EITC?
They came in determined not to give Obama any victories. This has clearly backfired on them. If they had been willing to bend at any point they'd have much more to show for their efforts today.
If they had taken his Grand Bargain in 2011, think what they would have.
A. Chained CPI
B. Raised the Medicare retirement age to 68
C. Ending the Bush tax cuts only for those who make over $1 million dollars a year.
Instead they got no A, no B, and the tax cuts expired for everyone who makes more than $450,000.
I suspect Ryan will want the GOP House to be more constructive in 2017-for his own legacy and future.
How can he run in 2020 otherwise?
3. Here is the dirty little secret-it's dirty because the Berners think this scandalous. There are some Republicans of standing who have a lot of respect for Hillary from her time on the Armed Services Committee during her Senate years.
Before she became the Democratic presumed nominee, John McCain and Lindsay Graham competed with each other for who could sniff her farts most deeply.
To be sure, McCain now finds himself in a dogfight for his Senate seat thanks to Trump and the refusal of him and his fellow GOP Senators to confirm Merrick Garland.
Assuming McCain survives, he will be in a more compromising mood.
Overall this is a theory. Theories can also be wrong. But I do think that a much more divided GOP will fail to unify on anything even opposition to Hillary Clinton.
Some will reason that they have to at least be seen to be making a good faith effort to do more than oppose everything.
E. Harding argued that the GOP in 2017 will do what they did in 2009-obstruct everything the Democrat President tries to do.
Sumner argues that, to the contrary, the GOP in 2017 will be a chastened party after Trump. They will be Germany post WWII not Germany post WWI.
This is a good insight by Sumner. I think it may well be the case.
Sumner is not always blessed with great insight: as he admits he failed to believe Trump could win the GOP nomination when me and Krugman already knew that this was very possible.
But this is an insight I haven't seen elsewhere.
I think Sumner is right here. The party is going to have a terrible Trump hangover.
1. It's natural to imagine the GOP will offer the same scorched earth opposition to a Hillary Administration they offered to Obama in 2009 or her husband in 1993. But the Trump Effect will be present this time.
In the Obama years, the one thing that unified the party was total opposition to all things Obama. But in the long term, a party unified only in what it opposes is no party at all as we've seen starting with the problem they had last year in even selecting a House Speaker.
2. Paul Ryan.
The failure to confirm Kevin McCarthy was the first clear sign that the GOP was no longer really a party at all, but rather a group of warring factions.
However, I have said all along that I think Ryan was a good choice. If anyone can lead the GOP in a better direction it might be Ryan.
No, I don't agree with him on much of anything ideologically. I agree with Krugman's mockery of Ryan's budgets and his plan to block grant Medicare.
But Ryan at least has the attributes of an actual leader. And this brings me to another reason I think Hillary might get a few things done in 2017: Ryan will see that the sort of scorched earth opposition the GOP offered Obama is not sustainable and has proven to be completely self-defeating.
He may well decide that the GOP has to at least work with Hillary and the Dems where agreement is possible.
The big criticism of the GOP during the Obama years has been that their total opposition to him has been so cynical: even things that they agreed on they refused to do.
On the MW, why not at least take a page out of the Sumner playbook and offer an higher EITC?
They came in determined not to give Obama any victories. This has clearly backfired on them. If they had been willing to bend at any point they'd have much more to show for their efforts today.
If they had taken his Grand Bargain in 2011, think what they would have.
A. Chained CPI
B. Raised the Medicare retirement age to 68
C. Ending the Bush tax cuts only for those who make over $1 million dollars a year.
Instead they got no A, no B, and the tax cuts expired for everyone who makes more than $450,000.
I suspect Ryan will want the GOP House to be more constructive in 2017-for his own legacy and future.
How can he run in 2020 otherwise?
3. Here is the dirty little secret-it's dirty because the Berners think this scandalous. There are some Republicans of standing who have a lot of respect for Hillary from her time on the Armed Services Committee during her Senate years.
Before she became the Democratic presumed nominee, John McCain and Lindsay Graham competed with each other for who could sniff her farts most deeply.
To be sure, McCain now finds himself in a dogfight for his Senate seat thanks to Trump and the refusal of him and his fellow GOP Senators to confirm Merrick Garland.
Assuming McCain survives, he will be in a more compromising mood.
Overall this is a theory. Theories can also be wrong. But I do think that a much more divided GOP will fail to unify on anything even opposition to Hillary Clinton.
Some will reason that they have to at least be seen to be making a good faith effort to do more than oppose everything.
No comments:
Post a Comment