Associated Press
One wonders what Romney would have said about FDR in 1936.
In 1936, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was seeking a second term during awful economic times. The New Deal was making a difference, but on Election Day, America's unemployment rate was 17%.
How in the world could an incumbent president win re-election with a 17% unemployment rate? Actually, it was pretty easy -- voters realized Roosevelt had inherited a brutal economic crisis, and while conditions were still awful, the economy was starting to improve, and Americans weren't willing to give power back to the party that had created the mess in the first place. FDR won that year with 98.5% of the electoral votes, winning 46 of the 48 states.
I wonder what Mitt Romney's campaign would have said if he were running at the time.
We talked briefly about this yesterday, but Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom presented a new argument at a campaign stop in Ohio that strikes me as rather remarkable.
"The fact that [the economy] struggled through the last three years is not the fault of Barack Obama's predecessor; it's the fault of this administration and the failure of their policies to really get this economy going again."
I see. So, as far as the Romney campaign is concerned, the Bush/Cheney era has nothing to do with our current economic conditions. The economy is struggling, and it's entirely the fault of the president who inherited the worst crisis since the Great Depression.
I can only imagine Romney and Fehrnstrom barnstorming the country in 1936. "Look at all of these closed factories! Look at the 17% unemployment rate! Look at the widespread poverty and long bread lines! Clearly, Roosevelt failed and the New Deal was a disaster."
Of course, 76 years ago, very few Americans found this perspective persuasive, but that was before modern media and super PACs could manage to get wide swaths of the country to believe strange things.
The facts, for those who still care about them, are not in dispute.
When President Obama was inaugurated, the global economy was in freefall. There was a banking crisis, a housing crisis, a jobs crisis, and an American auto industry -- the backbone of the nation's manufacturing sector -- that was poised to collapse. There were genuine fears that the financial system simply couldn't recover.
Nearly four years later, after a series of steps Obama took with no Republican support, an economy that was shrinking is now growing, an economy that was hemmoraging jobs is now adding jobs, and an auto industry that was crashing is now thriving.
For much of the country, that may not be good enough, just as for some, 17% unemployment in 1936 was a reason not to vote for FDR.
But if the Republicans' Landon/Knox '36 ticket seriously argued at the time, "The fact that the economy struggled through the last three years is not the fault of Franklin Roosevelt's predecessor," my sense is they would have been laughed at.
That few are laughing at Romney and Fehrnstrom today is unfortunate.
Leave a Comment:
Remember where we were as a country back on January 20, 2009? The country was on edge as many were talking about the real possibility of a complete economic meltdown and another Great Depression. The aftermath of Katrina was still fresh in our thoughts. A decade of politics of fear and politically convenient terror warnings had left us shell-shocked with constant terror on our minds. We remained in the midst of two wars, both of which were overextended and extraordinarily mismanaged.
The previous administration had left office with the country shedding 750,000 jobs a month, a massive deficit, a policy of torture, the American auto industry about to collapse, millions of homes foreclosed, tens of millions without access to health care, a politicized Department of Justice, FEMA in shambles, energy companies running the Interior Department with bribes of sex and cocain, an overextended military, Bin Laden on the run, and our reputation and moral leadership diminished. In every conceivable way, the country was driven into a ditch.
Even with all of the problems and challenges we continue to face, the country is in a much better place today than it was a few years ago. It is unfortunate that so many are unaware of President Obama's many accomplishments. And it's a damn shame that some have vilified and disrespected Obama as they have. I don't know of anyone currently in politics who could have addressed so many overwhelming challenges with such clarity while withstanding so much abuse with such dignity and grace.
That few are laughing at Romney and Fehrnstrom today is a direct result of a Republican messaging machine run amok aided daily by millionaire entertainers on cable and network news flogging a phony horserace and a feckless bunch of elected Democrats pandering to the rich and powerful instead of working for all Americans. The American people don't have a chance when none of the communication channels or government institutions are willing to discuss the obvious truth.
but that was before modern media and super PACs could manage to get wide swaths of the country to believe strange things.
A populace less educated, but a whole lot smarter
Besides Mr Orwell had yet to give the Republicans the guide.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
You should add a robust system of public works and other forms of aid, none of which we have now. Did the New Deal end the Depression? No. It wasn't meant to. Did it help? Certainly. But, politically, it helped FDR and the Democrats by demonstrating that something was being done, effort was being made, even if it wasn't working miracles. What did the Republicans have? Do I even have to ask? Obama's problem is that today's GOP has dragged everything so far to the right that today's Democrats are hardly any more effective than Hoover.
Suddenly I feel like shrieking in rage loudly enough to shatter tree trunks.
Hitler's Big Lie hadn't been seen yet as the winner it is politically. Fox is Josef Goebbel's dream cone true.
Agree.
I've said it before. The GOP is pedaling willful amnesia. The fact that more Americans aren't furious at the new "Entitlements are causing lazy Americans" campaign lines and that the Republican legislators are pushing a more extreme version of Bush-onomics just boggles my mind.
Myself, I've engaged in an email campaign to all the legislators in my state...asking Democrats to remind everyone that entitlements are up because millions are still looking for jobs and trying to feed their families. Asking Republicans where they get off trying to shift the blame on the people.
First we paid with our jobs.
Then we paid with Trillions in bail outs.
Now we are supposed to pay with our safety nets? While throwing more money at the people who took our jobs over seas and made bad business deals? What's in that kool-aid?
The whole approach by the GOP reminds me of Keanu Reaves in the Speed movies. Defy logic in order to win; speed up the train rather than try to slow or stop it. Go for broke; rather than just try to ban abortions, go further and ban contraception too. Don't compromise, even if it means ruining the country's credit rating or economy. Become more extreme than the opposition is prepared to deal with, and you increase your chances of winning.
Of course, the other possible outcome is that you crash and die in the end. And since this is real life and not a movie, thankfully this is the more likely outcome.
I think they have decide to go for broke too. The voter ID laws, anti women laws, they see this as their last chance. It probably will destroy the GOP, but the sad part is they are taking a lot of innocents down with them, and we will be left with the problem of how to deprogram about 33% of the population from their cult-like false beliefs.
I'm worried about the level of discourse in the US. When I try to add to a discussion, admittedly on the web where you never know what you're going to get, false equivalencies, insults and comments intended to shut-down are hurled. I get some conspiracy theory or an opinion that can't be proven.
It seems like the republican-run-network of 'news' is acting like a cult: Question anyone who doesn't believe our talking points; if they don't listen, they're bad (communist, Marxist, etc.) How does one get through that web of lies, talking points, and one-sided arguments?
I know our President is trying to compromise, incorporate republican ideas into legislation, and improve the economy. Why can't the people I comment with see this? It seems so wrong, but can this many people in red states be upset that our President isn't an old, white man? I'm in a blue state and have run across people trying to start a conversation about the President, saying "I don't like him, he's uppity."
The recovery after Roosevelt took office was much more rapid than that after 2009. The rates of real GDP growth for 1934, 1935 and 1936 were 10.9, 8.9 and 13.1% respectively, and employment also grew at rates not equaled since, except at the start of WW II. The reason the Great Depression was the worst was not because there was no recovery (after the bottom in 1933), but because of the length and depth of the plunge 1929-1933. Republicans were completely ousted in the elections of 1930 and 1932. Wall Street had lost a great deal of power during this time, and Glass-Steagall and other New Deal legislation greatly reformed banking and finance. Don't expect Obama to be able to act like or have electoral results like Roosevelt.
"I'd just add one nagging detail: this isn't good news or something the White House should necessarily brag about. Given the nature of the economic crisis, the national economy needed more spending, not less. Under these circumstances, the recovery would have been faster and more robust if Congress and the Obama administration had spent like, well, most modern Republican administrations."
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/20/10779346-forget-what-youve-heard-from-the-gop-about-spending-and-regulations
The only spending that could have passed Congress was even more spending on war and tax cuts for the richest.
So the GOP now says the country's problems the last 3 years have NOTHING to do with Bush's failures because he wasn't in office these last 3 years.
Hmm, but in the early Bush years, didn't they argue that many things, especially the 9/11 attacks, were Clinton's fault?
Standard-issue hypocrisy from the right.
Republicans are playing the Jesus card:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA50dwXKJcc
Just a reminder that the real recovery from the depths of the depression was armaments for WW II. US supplied UK with war materials. That brought back manufacturing in a big way.
And eventually, we couldn't just be the supplier of war materials. Pearl Harbor cured US unemployment big time.
Facts shmacks - the GOP care nothing about facts! FAUX NOISE is a fact free zone, and errybody knos libruls are liars! Steve, c'mon, can we just admit the facts - 1) there is an African-American in the White House, 2) the sheeple are terrified that they will somehow "loose their privileges", 3) Amer'ka is a white/christian nation and G-d is white too!
FEAR has these people paranoid, the Presidents calm demeanor in the face of being a Marxist/Kenyan/anti-colonialist/socialist/Amer'ka hating/communist - has further infuriated & thwarted their efforts at undermining HIS performance in the job that only old white guys are supposed to have.
The breakdown of our economy started with the Regan Revolution. Although Reagan admired FDR and said that the New Deal programs kept his family from starving, he still used anti government slogan KEPT GOVERNMENT OFF OUR BACKS to win the election. Too bad that Reagan did not starve. However, the breaking point for economy was Clinton pushing through the repeal of the Glass Steagall restriction on banks and investment companies. Under this law you had to be either a bank and serve unsophisticated people with savings and loans or an investment firms that would attract rich people who could take greater risks. The democrats also push for the repeal of this 70 year old law because the union support was dwindling and they needed the money from Wall St. to support their campaigns.
If we are unable to make further restrictions on banks and investment companies we are headed for another economic breakdown and we do not have a FDR to save capitalism.
Don't forget, it was Clinton who wiped out the Great Society programs that enabled millions who fell into poverty to achieve the measure of economic stability necessary to work their way back out. Today, a single job loss can result of losing everything -- your home, your possessions, even your children (note: Under welfare "reform," states can now take "indefinite custody" of children whose parents who fall into poverty, on the grounds of "failure to adequately provide" -- something that violates international human rights, per the UDHR, but Americans are fine with it.)
@ John Shepherd- So, Clinton "pushed through" the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act? He FORCED 81 Senators and well over 2/3s of all Congressmen in the House to vote to overturn it? Strange bit of reasoning you display in your slam on Clinton, isn't it?
DHBranski- why not provide a link to a source, any source, to confirm your claim that a state can now take "indefinite custody" of children whose parents fall into poverty? Oh, right, you can't, because no such law exists! Why do you people insist on ridiculous claims that have absolutely no basis in fact? Are you simply right-wing agitators pretending to actually care about anything or anyone other than your own narrow needs? Please, go troll somewhere else because you're not fooling too many people here with your fanciful lies. Or, are you really as ignorant of facts as your posts suggest? If so, I pray you don't take the rest of us down when you fall...
A simple (VERY simple) web search will clear up the misconceptions you both suffer from (if either of you actually want to know truth from falsehood, that is).
Because of the length and depth of the plunge 1929-1933. Republicans were completely ousted in the elections of 1930 and 1932. Wall Street had lost a great deal of power during this time, and Glass-Steagall and other New Deal legislation greatly reformed banking and finance. Don't expect Obama to be able to act like or have electoral results like Roosevelt. Yet the voting public took much of the Democratic power away and created the ability of the Republicans to play obstructionists this time around. Now they are running a vulture capitalist who likes to fire people and if elected will try and completely destroy social security and medicare. The Republican platform is based on trickle down economics and our gambler candidate wants to double down the bet. Has the voting electorate become that partisan and racist as to vote for their own oppression?
Stage 1 was to wipe out welfare aid, something that previous generations were unwilling to do. Stage 2 is to end food stamps. It's too early to tell if the next target should be Social Security or Medicare/Medicaid. Starting with Clinton, progress was made to dismantle Social Security Disability. One of the first things that Obama did was to restore SSI and SSDI, but I'm sure a Republican can get us back on track, restoring our upward wealth redistribution.
Unfortunately in a culture where instant gratification is almost expected and 24 hour news networks make yesterday's news feel like a century ago, voters are likely to forget exactly what got us into this mess in the first place and are even likely to be upset that the problems are not fixed immediately.
Hopefully, sense and reason will prevail in November.
Though today, we don't encourage poverty by allowing bread lines. We just aren't that generous. That said, we live in an era of widespread stupid. Consider that, since Reagan, our govt has redistributed trillions of dollars upward, mostly to corporations on the theory that this would "spur job creation." For 30+ years, this money has been used to build factories outside of the US, exporting our jobs. Solution? Give corporations more money! Of course, there is no money to directly invest in job creation here. How do we afford to do this while maintaining an almost-constant state of warfare since WWll? End welfare! Granted, the main welfare program, AFDC, used a mere 6% of the budget at its highest (1970s), but it's "common knowledge" that this was what was destroying our economy. It's just different from the 50%+ of the budget that foes into maintaining war and the ongoing Reagan tax cuts. The 6% was bankrupting the US, the 50%+ was just business. No matter, we've learned to be very flexible with reality. We elect a Repub., who tanks the economy, but that's a matter of "circumstances," not bad political decisions. We adjust, and praise the president for keeping things from being worse. (As GW Bush so famously said, "I'm not worried about the economy.") Then we elect a Dem, and literally within weeks of taking office, the media begins it's drumbeat about his failure to repair the economy. Within one year, even though the economy is gaining stability, media sounds the alarm bells. Within two years, the failure to turn a severe economic crisis into a thriving economy is declared proof of Dem. Party failure. People then elect a Repub., and the cycle is repeated. The fact is, reality is whatever the network news tells Americans to believe. Up is down, hot is cold, no matter, no time to think so the media thinks for us.
American household net worth peaked at $65.80 Trillion dollars in January of
2007.
American household net worth then declined through the end of the Bush
administration to $49.40 Trillion dollars. That's a lot of money.
The good or better news is that American households have recovered nearly
all of what was lost during the term so far of Barak Obama.
In fact, I think we are a little ahead.
"Our system of corporate taxation is also in urgent need of an overhaul.
Right now, with a top marginal rate of 35 percent, it vies for the developed
world's highest, placing our companies-indeed, our entire country-at a
competitive disadvantage." - Mitt Romney
No Mitt. That is a provable and proven falsehood that you and your
compatriots repeat and that the Republican electorate seems to believe for
some unknown reason.
Stupidity and ignorance come to mind but it really doesn't matter much. The
result is the same.
Basing economic policy prescriptions for what ails the American economy on
falsehoods is the definition of reckless foolishness. Insanity even.
The result is inevitably a disaster for the American middle class. The
real driving force behind America's economy.
Here are a few actual facts.
The things from which any policy ought to derive it's origin.
The latest OECD study measuring tax revenues as a percentage of GDP
revealed that of the 30 countries studied, the United States came in 28th.
Taxe revenues haven't been as low as they are today since the early 1950s.
Furthermore, marginal tax rates have never had any connection whatever to
economic growth in the United States. That's just a historical fact and it's
what the data show.
The World Bank's competitiveness report evaluating doing business across the
globe ranks the US fourth in the world.
The World Economic Forum's annual ranking of overall economic
competitiveness ranked the US fifth in the world.
In both the World Bank and OECD rankings the countries that score higher
than the US have a small fraction of the population of the United States.
Coubntries like Aruba or Liechtenstein.
So, taxes are hardly the problem in so far as rates need reducing.
The real problem lies in America's diversion of revenue towards tax
subsidies and cuts.
Both are expebditures in any sense of the word that is reasonable.
As recently as 2006 American infrastructure ranked in the top 10 according
to World Economic Forum. Today America ranks 24th.
U.S. air infrastructure has gone from 12th in the world to 31st.
Highways have dropped from 8th to 20th.
Municipal water treatment is falling apart all over the nation.
Approaching third world quality in some instances.
This and more are what is ailing America. Not high marginal tax rates.
Stupid Republicans.