Young Voters Far Less Enthusiastic For Obama This Time Around
Younger voters are starting to become as cynical as the rest of us.
One of the most striking phenomenon of the 2008 Presidential campaign was the manner in which Barack Obama’s campaign managed to excite younger voters, especially those in the 18-29 year old age cohort which has typically turned out at the polls far less than older voters ever since being granted the vote by the 26th Amendment. Indeed, voter turnout among this age group was 51.1%, the highest it had been since 1992 when it reached 52.0%, although still not as high as the all-time high for this group, which was reached in 1972 when 55.4% of 18-29 year olds voted. More importantly, though, this group voted for Obama over McCain by the amazing margin of 66% to 32%, thus proving themselves to be a valuable part of the Obama coalition. It didn’t take long, though, for things to start turning sour as the “Hope & Change” of the campaign gave way to realities of governing and the sour economy led many of these voters to realize that the job situation wasn’t good for them at all despite that college degree. By 2010, there was talk that younger voters were starting to feel abandoned by the President and, indeed, voter turnout among this group fell by 50% in the 2010 midterms. Now, with the election campaign coming to a close and the race incredibly close, there are signs that the Obama campaign many not be able to count on this group being as eager to show up at the polls:
The cheering midst of a rally featuring President Barack Obama and a largely college-age crowd of 15,000 on the Oval at Ohio State University would not seem a likely place to encounter those not in the president’s corner.
Yet, the first five students approached at random by a Dispatch reporter on Oct. 9 turned out to support Republican Mitt Romney and his aspirations of replacing Obama in the White House.
The must-vote adoration and enthusiasm for Obama isn’t what it once was among 18- to 29-year-old Millennials in central Ohio, a must-win area in a must-win state for presidential hopefuls.
This is not 2008, when two-thirds of the youth vote broke big for Democrat Obama and his message of change amid the accompanying offer of making history by electing the first black president.
This is 2012, with Obama running on a recession-riddled record. Job prospects are iffy for even educated young Ohioans. Some fear their generation is in danger of failing to match or better their parents’ now-dinged lifestyles.
Husband and wife William, 26, and Katherine Frost, 20, OSU students from Grove City, had high hopes for Obama but now are Romney voters. “Obama didn’t fulfill his promises,” she said. “I’m ready for a fresh change,” he said.
(…)
[C]ourting and turning out the votes of youth, who are less reliable in going to the polls than older voters are, is proving more difficult this time around — a trend that could work against Obama’s re-election chances.
National polls suggest Obama still enjoys a near 20 percentage-point advantage over Romney among young adults, but their enthusiasm has waned, leaving them less likely to vote than in 2008.
Polling late last month by the Pew Research Center found young voters, who have cast a majority of their votes for Democrats in the past three presidential elections, are significantly less engaged than in 2008.
Sixty-three percent of young registered voters plan to cast ballots this year, compared with 72 percent four years ago. And 61 percent call themselves “highly engaged” this year, down from 75 p ercent in 2008.
Herb Asher, a professor emeritus of political science at Ohio State, said youthful excitement over Obama has been tempered by the “real world and reality” of governing during tough times.
“And there’s nothing in particular about Romney’s candidacy that would have unique or special appeal to young people. Neither of the candidates today are considered to be rock stars by young people,” Asher said.
Asher expects Obama to be a favorite again with Millennials in central Ohio but adds a footnote: “The real question is not so much the level or loyalty of support but turnout. … The youth vote is an integral part of his strategy and extremely important here.”
These anecdotal reports from the Ohio State campus are corroborated by a new poll released last week by Harvard’s Institute Of Politics, which shows younger voters far less enthusiastic about the President than they were four years ago:
When America’s 18-29 year-olds were asked which presidential candidate they trust more to handle a number of top issues, late September IOP polling shows President Obama favored over Governor Romney on health care (+23), foreign policy (+23), to be the Commander-in-Chief of the military (+22), immigration reform (+20) – and the economy (+19 percentage points). Obama was also trusted more to handle “issues of concern to someone your age” (+31) and “issues of concern to women (+33).
In addition, six-in-ten Millennials (62%) said the statement: “the problems President Barack Obama inherited are so complex it takes more than four years to do the job” came closer to their own view, while only a third (33%) said the same about the statement: “despite his best efforts, President Obama has failed.
18- to 29- year-old voters favoring Gov. Romney are more likely (65%) than those favoring President Obama (55%) to say they will “definitely” be voting this fall. Overall, 48% say that they will “definitely” vote in the November elections, with another ten percent (10%) saying “probably” and sixteen percent (16%) saying “50-50”
On some level it’s not all that surprising that this voting cohort has lost the enthusiasm that they had four years ago. After all, many of the promises that the President made back then — from greater transparency to fixing the way Washington works to closing Gitmo haven’t come to pass. The old slogan of “Hope & Change” has been replaced by the far more ambiguous “Forward.” And, most importantly, these voters find themselves facing a future that is far less bright than they might have thought it would be as recently as four years ago. Moreover, I can’t really say that the President has given this group of voters much of anything to be enthusiastic about over the next four years, and it’s often much harder to get people excited about voting against someone than it is to get them to vote for someone. Given this, it’s not at all surprising to see them feeling far less enthusiastic about the President than they did four years ago. Will it have an impact on the race? That’s hard to say, but whenever a candidate finds themselves unable to generate turnout from their most important constituencies it ought to be a sign of concern. In a close election, a difference of a few percentage points between 2012 and 2008 could make all the difference in the world.
There’s another side to this equation, of course. While it’s true that the President has likely disappointed younger voters and the state of the economy, it’s also true that these voters had rather unrealistic expectations for an Obama Presidency:
[T]he other problem with the younger voters that rallied behind Obama is that they simply had unrealistic expectations of what he could do, even with majorities in both Houses of Congress and notwithstanding the fact that there was a severe economic downturn that pretty much put the rest of the campaign agenda on the back burner. The idea that Barack Obama was going to “remake Washington,” which was one of the common themes that seemed to motivate younger voters two years ago, was simply naive in the extreme, and anyone who’s been following politics long enough knew from the start that it was a promise he could never keep.
So now, these voters have had their unrealistic hopes replaced by the harsh light of reality, and the result seems to be that they’ve become as cynical about politics as the rest of us. Welcome to the club, kids.
Thankfully, these same voters have no enthusiasm for Romney.
Obama’s turnout machine is going to swamp Romney’s. Just look at early voting.
I can’t think of any way to say it than this parody – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJnAp3YxCCw
Reality bites. But the young and dumb had to get their life lesson from someone.
I got real sour about the Obamabots back in 2008 because I knew this was going to happen. It took a lot to make the culture surrounding a candidate seem as bad, in its own was, as George W. Bush, but the bastards pulled it off.
I’m really damned sick of cynicism in politics, especially the perverse celebration of it. It’s not helping at all, seems to act as a way to sound like you understand something while in fact being wildly ignorant and I get the feeling that it ends up just ceding more ground to the jackasses, making it something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Foolishness and naïveté are the real problems; cynicism is just them in a knock-off Chanel dress.
Do you really prefer the lessons of the Bush era? Fake prosperity via easy credit followed by an economic Chernobyl? Starting an elective war and putting it on the credit card? Telling “Brownie” what a good job he was doing while Americans were dying?
Keep on pretending the Bush years never happend and blame everything on the damage control crew – maybe the young and the dumb will fall for it.
@anjin-san:
You would have a point about the false prosperity via easy credit but did you ever question the false prosperity of the Clinton Adminstration and the irrational run up of the stock market and the creation of large number of companies that had no chance of ever marking a profit.
What the young should realize is that there are always winners and losers with every government program and no matter how many times David Axelrod tries to convince them that there is a free lunch (such as tax the rich and increase spending on everything else).
The real quesiton for the 20 something voters is who will be the long term winners and long term losers in the economy. More of them should probably look forward to a career in government since the private sector is turning into a large number of low paying jobs and a few super paying jobs.
well 4 yrs of blaming others just doesn’t bode well for 4 more i guess.
I guess they learned the hard way that Republicans did not want Obama to succeed and were willing to do anything to preclude him from success.
Welcome to the real world.
@al-Ameda:
That’s pretty much been the obvious lesson from the last 4 years, but I can’t for the life of me see why or how it should benefit Romney and the GOP.
@bill:
I am so sick of this dishonest bullsh!t from Republicans I want to punch one.
Your idiot president left us with two unfunded wars, a tax cut we couldn’t afford, massive and escalating debt, and an economic meltdown.
If Mr. Romney wins we will have left him with gradually rising employment, a completely recovered stock market, a unified allied front on Iran, no more Iraq and a recovering housing market.
How dare you. How fwcking dare you dishonest, lying, race-baiting, obstructionist scumbags pull that “blaming others” crap? You sh!t all over the floor and smear it on the walls and then complain because we didn’t clean it up quite fast enough?
Republicans are scum. Really, just cutting through it all, you’re just scum. I can’t pretend to civility with you people anymore. We have to drag you people like a dead weight into the 21st century, you backward, money-toadying, woman-hating, gay-bashing, Ignorant, superstitious, hateful racist cretins.
Just to clarify: we don’t blame “others.” We blame the guilty parties. We blame George W. Bush and the Republican congress and the morons who support them. We blame the responsible parties.
Reality check….Imagine with me FDR being this concerned over the question of our military response to Pearl Harbor was “Paid for”.
Hint: It’s not your money, nor is it his.
to which Obama responded by pouring gasoline on the fire…. the only approved use of Gas these days by a liberal, apparently.
No sale.
No, liberals will have left him a disaster not seen since the aforementioned FDR. Something of a pattern, here.
@Eric Florack:
And you are exhibit A.
I’ll take that as a compliment, Reynolds.
Fact: Under Obama, we’ve spent $11 dollars for ever $7 taken in and most of that on welfare programs. (Treasury Dept Data) Welfre programs came out at $754 billion… and they’re not done counting yet.
But of course, it’s the military spending tha’s the problem, right, Mike?
Lemme know when you came back to earth, OK>?
@Eric Florack:
I’m not sure why you’re bringing Pearl Harbor or FDR in a military comparison, although it’s a useful reminder that the George W Bush recession was the worst since the Great Depression.
@Eric Florack:
Can you explain to me why a guy like you who I can guarantee has never paid a dime net in federal income taxes backs a party that wants to make me richer?
Let me explain this to you: I’m not going to create a job for you. I’m going to spend the money traveling overseas, staying in the kinds of hotels that don’t let people like you use their restrooms, and gorging on $500 dinners in places that wouldn’t hire you to bus the tables.
And yet, there you are, desperately striving to make sure me and people like me get to look even further down our noses at people like you. Can you explain what is going on in your head? You’re not only an economic loser, you’re too dumb to stand up for yourself, too dumb to see that people like me and my “class” will just take the tax cuts and laugh at you. It’s like a downward spiral of contempt that you bring on yourself. If you had some spine to stand up for people in your situation, but no, that might mean making common cause with a black man at some point, so it’s forelock-tugging and bootlicking from you.
@Eric Florack:
So you’re unhappy that we increased food stamp spending during and after a recession? Are you also surprised and upset when the gas tank is empty after driving a vehicle? Or do you just run out of gas?
@Eric Florack:
When you get sick, Eric, you’ll end up in an emergency room, then being dunned for the rest of your miserable life. Democrats tried to save you from that, but no, you have fantasies of yourself as, what, exactly? What do you think you are? Do you think you’re a job creator? Do you think you’re heading for some future other than taxpayer-subsidized medicare and medicaid and a lousy old folks home?
Why don’t you explain to me how life for you, Eric Florack, unemployed truck driver, is going to get better when Mr. Romney is elected.
@michael reynolds:
You forgot to mention that Republicans are uncivil, too.
@Eric Florack:
You are a classic. You hate African-Americans and immigrants so much you can’t see that you’re no better off. Who do you think the ACA was for? For me? I don’t need it. It’s for you. It’s so you don’t end up sick and living in a cardboard box. And you can bluster all you want, but we both know that’s a real possibility in your life. You, you personally, Eric Florack, can get sick and end up in debt and untreated, losing your home. But you’re so spiteful that so long as you can be sure a black person suffers, you’re fine with your own life being pathetic.
You’re a sucker.
Unemployed? where do you get that notion? And never paid income tax? Please.
Are you always so inaccurate with your assessments of others? Apparently so.
Let’s get this straight; I’m fully employed. I went to driving when my job of 15 years ended after Obama got into office… along with the 400+ people I supported at the time. …a reaction by my then employer to (correctly) predicted economic downturns under Obama. Instead of hanging out on welfare, and all that, I found a job that would keep us afloat financially, (And I must say, satisfying a whim I’ve always had to drive truck, and see the country) while the American voter woke up.
And so they have. See, Mike, at least you’ve got one thing correct, or so I take from your despondent attitude. Obama has lost re-election. The only question remaining is how large a victory Romney is headed for. Mind, I’m no fan of Romney, but it’s far far batter than four more years of the kind of nonsense we’ve dealt with.
As to how things get better under Romney, let’s do it this way, with just a few points of the many I can think of;
When government grows, freedom shrinks And freedom has been shrinking, under Obama, as government grew at a rate never seen before. . That will be reversed.
Energy prices go down.
With them, food prices go down, as will the cost of everything else when we put an end to the left’s war on energy since it takes energy to deliver all of it, as well as make it.
I’ll be able to tend my own healthcare needs in a way that suits me and not some govt bureaucrat.
At which point I’ll be able to place both more money in my own retirement and healthcare funds. You see, some of us plan for being able to take care of ourselves, and not depend on the great god government. You see, I don’t need government to save me. Nor do I want them to claim they’re trying.
Or, for that matter, you.
@Septimius: LOL…
@Eric Florack:
What kind of brain damage is required to believe this?
Except, of course, Japan actually did directly attack our country so it was the right thing to do to declare war against Japan…Iraq, on the other hand, was a totally different set of circumstances…there was nothing like Pearl Harbor where Iraq is concerned…
But the spending belongs to all of us and Bush and his ilk payed for that spending with debt rather than taxing people to pay for it…
Oh yes, because the way the government should respond to a recession is to tighten its belt, yeah, that’ll certainly bring a country out of recession…
What an idiotic thing to write…FDR is considered one of, if not the greatest president of the 20th century…
Some people’s “facts” are so easily refutable by the data…better luck next time…
Oh pardon all of us…when you have a group of people who cause a huge mess and then place all the blame on the guy who is supposed to come in to fix the mess, you will forgive everyone who isn’t civil to that group…
@Eric Florack:
Sorry, you an employed truck driver. Average salary what, 50K? Give or take? Which means you pay next to nothing in federal income tax. So, just to be clear: it’s not your money paying for food stamps or welfare, it’s mine.
Drivel. Tell me how freedom has shrunk. Not with bluster, with actual examples.
Ah hah hah hah. No, genius, if the economy picks up, energy prices do not go down. Energy prices are not coming down unless the worldwide economy collapses, or we have some incredible technological breakthrough. And a war with Iran will definitely not help gas prices.
This is so sad. Are you really that ignorant? You think on the 50K or so you make that you can handle the 40k in co-pays you’ll have for a heart attack or cancer? You’ve already been laid off once, you don’t think that could ever happen again? How about if a family member also gets sick? You’re delusional. You get seriously ill and lose your job? You’ll be praying for a government “bureaucrat.” Talk to Anjin-San about this sometime. You’re living in a fantasy world.
If only we could be sure of that, Eric. But of course when the sh!t hits the fan you’ll quietly creep back in and take every penny you can get. It’s just that it will cost people like me even more to pay your bills.
Ah, so now that real estate meltdown is Obama’s fault too. How about the Panic of 1857 – Obama’s fault as well? The Hindenburg disaster ? Obama?
So you have a million or two in cash set aside for medical in your declining years?
You are a truck driver, yes? You need roads to earn a living. Who built that?
@Eric Florack:
Seems unlikely that someone who blames the Dec 2007 to June 2009 recession on a president who took office in late Jan 2009 would be capable of advanced financial planning. So I have to conclude that you are who Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid were designed for.
florack:
You are channeling a hot new story in the wingnutosphere.
Washington Times: “Welfare spending jumps 32% during Obama’s presidency”
NewsMax: “Congressional Report: Welfare Spending Soars Under Obama”
RedState: “Obama’s Legacy: $1.03 Trillion in Welfare Spending”
Fox: “Obama Increased Welfare Spending By 33%”
Heritage: “Welfare Spending Hitting the $1 Trillion Mark”
National Review: “Total Welfare Spending Now at $1 Trillion”
And what has triggered all this fuss? GOP Senators asked CRS to produce a report, so they did. Jeff Sessions making a fuss about the report is here (link, link). The report itself is here (pdf).
And what does the report really tell us? That there are a lot of government programs that are “recession-sensitive,” so there are going to be big increases in those programs when we have a big recession. Duh. The list of items includes such things as EITC and the child tax credit, which were programs created mostly by the GOP.
So here’s the GOP formula for success:
– Put in place a bunch of recession-sensitive programs.
– Adopt policies that lead us into an enormous recession.
– Blame the D president for the fact that the GOP recession is forcing us to spend lots of money on those GOP-created programs.
Genius!
It’s also fun to look at headlines like this:
The genius of this claim is that it’s based on the idea that Obama is fully responsible for FY09, even though it began before he was even elected. This particular bit of genius pops up a lot. Mitt’s narrative about deficit and debt embodies precisely the same idea (and the press rarely calls him on this; that darn liberal media). How wrong this is was explained by Cato Institute:
That is, the budget for the period 1/20/09 to 9/30/09 “was largely set in place while Bush was in the White House.” This issue of how to treat FY09 is critically important because it was the worst year ever. Assigning that debt to Obama shifts the analysis dramatically. That’s why it’s a big problem that this issue is
very widely overlooked. I discussed this in more detail here.
The above claim (“Obama Increased Welfare Spending By 33%”) is based on comparing FY08 with FY11. Trouble is, this makes Obama responsible for the jump from FY08 to FY09, even though FY09 was Bush’s budget, not his. And what was the jump from FY08 to FY09? 23%, in just one year. And what is the jump from FY09 to FY11? Under 8%.
So most of that 33% increase took place on GWB’s watch, not Obama’s. Typical GOP budget flimflam.
anjin-san:
michael:
The GOP is like a gang of arsonists heckling the fire department and arguing that the arsonists should be in charge again.
Florack, you should clean up your old lies (example, example, example) before you start posting a bunch of new ones.
We all still remember your brave battle cry of “Oh God, oh please – save me from Osama” as you supported Bush’s rollback of civil liberties in the wake of 9.11.
@Eric Florack: So you manage to support 400 people on a truck driver’s salary? That’s pretty impressive. And every bit as convincing as the rest of the gas you spew.
florack:
This is a good moment to recall that you told us a couple of days before Obama was elected that he would lose and there would be “rioting in Grant park.”
You’ve got quite a track record.
@michael reynolds: I am so sick of this dishonest bullsh!t from Republicans I want to punch one.
…
Republicans are scum. Really, just cutting through it all, you’re just scum. I can’t pretend to civility with you people anymore. We have to drag you people like a dead weight into the 21st century, you backward, money-toadying, woman-hating, gay-bashing, Ignorant, superstitious, hateful racist cretins.
Nine “helpful” votes, zero “unhelpful” votes.
Tell you what, michael: voter registration rolls are public. Why don’t you go down to your town/city clerk’s office, find a couple of Republicans close to your home, go up to them, tell them what you think of them, then punch them in the face?
Then come back and tell us how satisfying it was.
His anger is no worse than yours…how many of the people that you spew your anger at have you actually confronted in person…
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Oh, sorry, is it not okay when we push back?
How about you, Jenos. How big do you think your tax cut will be? Zero dollars? It seems I’m in line for about 40 grand extra. Was that the outcome you were hoping for? Is that what you’re fighting for? More money for Michael Reynolds?
Why? The psychology of this is so weird to me. Come on, you’re capable of writing a coherent sentence, Indy/Jay, so why don’t you take a stab at explaining why it’s so important that guys like you be left vulnerable to medical impoverishment and guys like me get an extra trip to Paris?
Giants up by one!
For a few of you… THe downturn prior to 08 was relatively minor. Obama made it worse. Just like FDR did, Thing is, nobody should be shocked by that since they were of the same mind as regards the role of government. The old experimentation, I think he called it.
And jukebox grads, sit back and watch.
Anjin; what civil liberties did you lose as a result of our response to the terrorism we faced? Be specific.
In any event, if you bother looking you may notice that highways were in the constitution. Health care was not. Nor are direct payments to individuals so that they don’t have to work.
WR; since you obviously don’t have the intelligence to figure this one out yourself the Ford people I was supporting involved desktop support as in computer systems analyst. I was responsible for anything little like trots flowing through it, essentially.
Those 400 people lost their jobs before I did.
Oh, and Michael? 58 k doesn’t come Any closer than the rest of your comments. Do try again.
Funny thing; Shrinking government brought our economy out of the Carter caused recession.
It'[s called recognition of reality and blaming those responsible. Try it sometime. It’s clearly beyond the ability of Reynolds. Show us you’re better than that.
@Eric Florack:
What? Try that explanation again, starting with the actual recession dates of December 2007 to June 2009, and Obama’s inaguration date of late Jan 2009.
Who was President in 2008?
@michael reynolds: Oh, sorry, is it not okay when we push back?
Oh, so NOW you’re interested in dialogue?
No, thanks, you made your feelings abundantly clear in your first comment. If you’re looking for a volunteer to be your punching bag, forget it. Go frak yourself with a rusty chainsaw.
Really? Highways are something that came along in th 20th century.
It’s weird these people on the right are all worried about civility after almost 4 years of socialism, death panels, government run health care, voter fraud and “teh deficits1!!!11”.
@Jenos Idanian #13: Ohh, big man Jenos is so offended he bravely stands up and challenges MR to fight. Not with him, of course, because he might get hurt. But to fight with some other Republican.
Just the way he likes his wars to be fought – invade whoever annoys Jenos today, put tens of thousands of Americans in harms way (and uncountable numbers of brown people), make America proud — just make sure little Jenos is never put in a position where he’s the slightest bit inconvenienced.
Oh, and don’t even think of taxing him to pay for the wars he urges. Just cut food stamps.
Hey, Michael, I think you forgot “cowardly chicken-hawk losers” in your list of attractive Republican attributes.
@Eric Florack: “WR; since you obviously don’t have the intelligence to figure this one out yourself the Ford people I was supporting involved desktop support as in computer systems analyst. I was responsible for anything little like trots flowing through it, essentially.”
Oh, so you were like a secretary. Sweet. Between that and the truck gig, there’s no way you’ll ever have any trouble paying for advanced medical care.
By the way, could you take a moment and point to the phrase “interstate highway system” in the constitution? I can’t seem to find it there.
@anjin-san: Really? Highways are something that came along in th 20th century.
Funny, in 1555 the English Parliament passed the Highway Act. The term “Highwayman” dates back to 1617. And the Bible refers to “the King’s Highway” in Numbers 20:17-21.
Care to reconsider your proclamation?
@wr: Offended, oh brain-dead one? Not in the least. Actually, a little pleased — it’s nice when the Usual Gang of Idiots here let their masks slip and show their true, hateful nature.
With you, though, it’s barely a domino mask.
Just as turnout for all groups had significant drops during the 2010 election from the 2008 election. Just as every mid term election sees a much lower turnout during midterms as opposed to presidential elections.
You did know that right Doug?
@ Jenos Idanian
Well, try driving your car (assuming you have one) on a Biblical highway and get back to us on how it works out. But, if you want to pretend that a Elizabethan cart path is the same thing as a modern highway, have at it. We realize you don’t get to have much fun.
@Eric Florack:
How does this figure into your narrative of the left’s war on energy?
After the Boom in Natural Gas:
Never mind answering — it’ll be as full of shit as everything else you post here.
Hmm. The median pay for a truck driver is what, 55K? You have not been in the field for very long, and you are a middle aged guy who does not look as if he takes very good care of himself, so it seems unlikely that you are some kind of super truck driver. You are also a proven liar about a thousand times over, so I don’t think anyone is inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt.
@anjin-san: Highways are exactly what they were back then — the most advanced, travel-friendly public roadways of their times.
Try taking a horse and carriage down the PCH — it ain’t optimized for horse-powered horsepower and rigid wheels.
@Eric Florack:
Reality indicates otherwise.
Today’s Republicans remind me of a pack of guys who arrive at a party uninvited and unannounced, and proceed to puke on the sofa, urinate on the carpet, and punch holes in the wall, and leave complaining that. “this place is a dump.”
Electing Romney would be approving of that behavior.
That’s kind of the point, though you obviously don’t understand it.
Giants up 5-0…
@anjin-san: No, you’re the ignoranus here. Let me repeat my point, with the key part emphasized:
Highways are exactly what they were back then — the most advanced, travel-friendly public roadways of their times.
Particulars change, but the principles are eternal.
Nothing sums up the GOP for me over the past four years than the following:
How does anyone ever take them seriously?
@Jenos Idanian #13:
And we care what the constitution says about health care or public spending why? It’s a document that’s a couple hundred years old that essentially can’t be changed, so it’s borderline worthless when discussing modern life.
Yes, that’s right up there with ‘get your government hands off my medicare.’
GOP rhetoric is packed with so many contradictions that even their contradictions have contradictions.
@sam: Interesting article. A few things jumped out at me.
1) One major factor in the success of the Haynesville Shale development is hyrdaulic fracturing, or “fracking.” The formal term is used exactly once, the more common pejorative not at all.
2) The leases on the key properties were all signed in 2008 or earlier. In other words, Obama “didn’t build that.”
So. that economic boom? Bush’s fault.
Well, because the Constitution says we can have a research vessel on Mars, for one thing. Oh, wait…
@Jenos Idanian #13:
So, in summary: No, you can’t explain why you should be so desperately in favor of my tax cut, or so determined to end up holding a cardboard sign that reads “Need medicine, anything will help. God bless.”
You cannot make the case for Romney.
Neither can Eric.
For that matter, neither can James Joyner who just mumbles something about how he’s not one of those crazy Republicans and never really talks about the election.
James at least I understand, because I’m not sure his paying gigs would still be there for him if he suddenly switched parties. And he actually pays taxes. You guys, on the other hand? Eric’s got fantasies and you got even less.
Wrong again, as usual…
Perhaps you could try a little harder next time…
This is just part of their whole victimhood complex…it’s perfectly fine for them to say the most outrageous things, but when that is thrown back in their faces, the are suddenly in need of the smelling salts and the fainting couches…
@Jenos Idanian #13:
By the way, I keep some ones and fives in the side pocket of my car as “hobo money.” I wonder how many of those poor men and women thought they were immune and would never need help. But that could never happen to you or Eric because. . . ?
@michael reynolds:
If anyone wants to know wthat many considered Outsidethebeltway a leftist website, all anyone has to do is look at all of the up votes and good comments that MR received for this vuglar, hate filled rant.
I remember when the Democrats said in 2004 that all the Republicans have is fear. Now all the Democrats have left is hatred of anyone who will not give them what they want. I read the Democratic Party described the gimmedat party and MR goes out of his way to fulfill the stereotype.
Image what kind of totalitarians country the U.S. would be if people like MR were given control.
@ Florack
Let’s say, God forbid, that you slip on some ice this weekend and break your back. The doctor tells you that you are never going to walk again. Your house now needs to be retrofitted. 50k is probably a low estimate. You may need in-home care. I know someone who is getting that now – 20K a month – luckily for him, he is rich. You can’t drive a truck anymore, so your income is gone.
Are you honestly telling us you have assets on hand to deal with this kind of a situation? These things happen, it’s happened to several people I know.
@superdestroyer:
You’re worried about me? Gosh, that’s sweet. You forget: I’m one of the white, straight, male, entrepreneurial 1%. Why, I’m just like MItt Romney. I’m one of the people you worship and serve.
Mmm, the sweet smell of hypocrisy, as the racist hate-monger with the ridiculous screen name calls “Mean!” on me.
@superdestroyer:
I can only imagine the brutal hellscape that would be single payer health care. The horror of it is almost unbearable.
@anjin-san:
That could not happen. Eric Florack will never slip and fall. He’s superman.
Well, a big pile of rocks strategically placed just outside of the encampment of an enemy tribe were super weapons once upon a time. I guess in Indy-land, a pile of rocks and a submarine launched, MIRVed nuclear missile are the same thing.
@David M:
Don’t you know single payer is how the Nazis started out?
@michael reynolds: “Don’t you know single payer is how the Nazis started out? ”
I thought it was vegetarianism and watching Michael Moore movies. I’d better go check my Jonah Goldberg book again…
@michael reynolds: So, in summary: No, you can’t explain why you should be so desperately in favor of my tax cut, or so determined to end up holding a cardboard sign that reads “Need medicine, anything will help. God bless.”
You cannot make the case for Romney.
Yes, I can. But I choose not to with you. Because you’re not looking for a dialogue, you’re looking for a fight. In particular, a fistfight.
I’m passing. I deal with enough assholes already.
You opened up with insults and threats of physical violence, not debating points. And you haven’t walked that back. So screw you.
@anjin-san: Gee, what a surprise. A guy with no principles doesn’t understand the concept of eternal principles.
Crossbows were once superweapons. Gunpowder was the equivalent of a WMD.
The citations about “highways” were not about “modern paved divided roadways,” but about “public roadways that represent the most efficient form of individual vehicle transportation.”
Let’s see: for starters, people who are working are making less money, gas prices have almost doubled, and food prices go up weekly. I would say that is enough right there to affect someone’s enthusiasm.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Riiiight. Everyone who believes this, raise your hand.
Oh, sure, you could make an eloquent and convincing case, but, um, I might argue with you. So you can’t. Because, um, you’re scared I might fly 3000 miles and punch you. Yes. This is absolutely plausible.
A 58 year old kid’s book writer on the west coast is so scary you forgot why you like Romney.
Okay, then: make the case to David M. He seems pleasant. I bet he’d love to see what you have to say.
@ Jenos
Since you have cited Elizabethan “highways”, lets reconcile them with this statement:
Now Roman roads were not equalled until the early 19th century. So it’s a bit hard to see how a glorified cart path in England was the “most advanced” road of it’s time when the Via Appia, built nearly two millennia previously, was a vastly superior.
And since the “highways” of the Elizabethan era were plagued by highwaymen, a group of thieves whos legend persists to this day, you can have a decent debate about the “travel-friendly” nature of those roads.
Perhaps Florack would follow the Ayn Rand example…
@michael reynolds: I am so sick of this dishonest bullsh!t from Republicans I want to punch one.
Your idiot president left us with two unfunded wars, a tax cut we couldn’t afford, massive and escalating debt, and an economic meltdown.
If Mr. Romney wins we will have left him with gradually rising employment, a completely recovered stock market, a unified allied front on Iran, no more Iraq and a recovering housing market.
How dare you. How fwcking dare you dishonest, lying, race-baiting, obstructionist scumbags pull that “blaming others” crap? You sh!t all over the floor and smear it on the walls and then complain because we didn’t clean it up quite fast enough?
Republicans are scum. Really, just cutting through it all, you’re just scum. I can’t pretend to civility with you people anymore. We have to drag you people like a dead weight into the 21st century, you backward, money-toadying, woman-hating, gay-bashing, Ignorant, superstitious, hateful racist cretins. </i.
Screw you, you sociopathic egomaniac with delusions of adequacy.
@ Jenos
I’m curious, how did you reach that conclusion about me? I am a model citizen – work hard, pay my taxes, & support charity. I provide financial support to a number of relatives, hell, I bought my mother in law a condo. Three times a week, I find time to shop for a relative who is mentally ill and help him clean up the room I got for him in a boarding house. I have a large circle of friends, and most of those friendships go back many decades. I’ve overcome serious substance abuse issues and have been clean and sober for 23 years. I have clients that have won Grammy and Emmy awards, so I think I am on solid ground saying I have a good reputation in my business life.
You may take issue with my politics, but I am pretty hard pressed to see where you get the idea I am without principals. Perhaps you could elaborate –
@michael reynolds: Michael, your numbers are off on the heart attack or cancer. I have a friend who is getting treatment for liver cancer at the moment and in his case, $40 k is the part of the bill that Medicade (he had just lost his job when diagnosed) isn’t paying. His insurance from the last job would have left a co-pay of slightly under $100,000.
Save your money agressively Eric, getting sick is costlier than any of us realize.
Obama’s greatest failing was that he actually thought that the Republicans would put the welfare of country above partisan gain. That was truly naive and it took three years for him to realize that the Republicans would ruin the country in order to make Obama a one term president.
Frankly, I do blame him for that and for not making the Replublicans play a price for their near treasonous behavior.
Obama needed to be a bit more realistic and ruthless , but then again maybe he wouldnt have been as inspiring and attractive to the youth. He would have achieved more, Though, I think.
Fully agree with what Micheal Reynolds said. As far as I am concerned, the Republicans in Congress can all die in a fire.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Here.
80 plus comments and none of them on topic.
Mostly filled with rants and childish fights. No wonder our government can’t pass legislation, when the voters work with generalizations and can’t be civil.
I kind of wish the old OTB would return where comments were on topic and generally respectful.
@Jenos Idanian #13: “Yes, I can. But I choose not to with you. ”
Which is to say: “Nuh-huh. I can so run around the playground so fast you can’t even see me. But I’m not going to because you made me mad.”
Funny, I tend to think of Jenos as one of the internet’s perpetual adolescents, but at this point it’s hard to credit him with an intellectual age above six or seven.
Vamos Gigantes! Game 7 in SF Monday night!
@Just Me:
I don’t know that the thread is off topic. Would the younger voters be less disillusioned if that GOP hadn’t been in constant obstruction / batsh!it insane mode since Obama was elected?
Iranian Mullahs, Hugo Chavez, Putin, and Castro all join with MR in supporting Obama over a scum republican, like Romney.
Way to go!
I’ll have what he’s having.
In a previous thread (about George McGovern), I said something to the effect that Superdestroyer’s series of posts there were collectively the stupidest that I have ever seen on this blog. And then I read this thread. And read Florack’s series of posts. I am reconsidering my earlier statement.
@jan:
Oh, shut up. You are just stupid.
I look forward to the cheerleading by Eric and Jan, et al, on Romney’s demonstration tomorrow night of his foreign policy chops.
As someone who is on the cusp between Gen X and Millenials, and who voted for Obama in 2008, I will provide my prospective. My disillusionment is twofold.
1. The number one issue that I care about is civil liberties, rights if the accused and police/prosecutorial power/abuse. Obama talked a really good game about that subject in the run-up to 2008. He has been nothing short of abysmal in that category. As a matter of fact, he has come in we’ll to the right of GWB on several of those issues. The only mitigating factor here is his appointment of Sotomayor and Kagan, who have been better than expected on those issues.
2. This second one is not Obama’s fault, but is disallusionment with government in general. Republicans have completely short circuited the functioning of government. Congress has always had contention and disagreement, but eventually the two sides come to a compromise to keep the country running. But now that the Republcans have taken the view that compromise means Democrats come over to the Republican position, or the whole country can go f%#* themselves, governing as an institution has broken down. And since the Democrats seem completely unable to do anything about it, or to make the breath-holding obstructionists pay for it electorally, a large percentage of my generation has simply given up hope.
These two things together add up to very low enthusiasm and turn-out from the Millenials. I live in Rhode Island, so my presidential vote is completely meaningless. So I’ll probably vote for Johnson as a civil liberties protest vote. Not that it really matters.
@David M:
No need to imagine. Just look to our neighbor to the north, Canada, to see the nightmare of an all-encompassing totalitarian nationwide gulag made flesh. There’s a reason, after all, that Canada is known as the North Korea of North America….
Bloomberg: Wealthy advised to sell for gains before unfriendly 2013. If Obama wins many will take this advice and the paralysis of the economy will only deepen.
@ Jan
Like these people or not, they are the leaders of their countries and important figures on the world stage. They are responsible for the lives of their citizens. It is not unreasonable of them to want the commander in chief of the most powerful military in the history of the world to be a proven rational actor. Romney’s inability to handle a slam dunk PR trip to England raises some legitimate concerns about his ability to function successfully on the world stage – and they probably have the memory of 100K or so dead innocents in Iraq in mind.
I know conservatives are more comfortable reducing world affairs to a cartoon level of us good/them bad, but the real world is a bit more complicated than that.
@Clanton:
Oh really? Since when? You realize, don’t you, that gas prices were higher in the early summer of 2008 than they are now, right? You realize, don’t you, who the President was at that time, right? You realize, don’t you, that there was a global economic collapse that ensued, which of course drove energy demand down worldwide, resulting in lower gas prices, right?
Your weak sauce may work at Redstate. Not here.
@bk:
The truth hurts>
@wr:
We have a winner. I could not possibly top that. Congratulations “wr”
@jan:
LOL! The market has done extremely well under Obama, so I can understand why they’d want to realize their profits now, don’t you?
Yea, that Obama, such a downer for the stock market. Good think Jan clued us in.
Really? You yap incessantly, but you have yet to do so. Sorry, rants about fast & furious do not a case make…
@michael reynolds: Tell us how you really feel.
@Eric Florack: So Romney is now a true conservative because he’s “winning”?
I’m curious to see how the conservatives feel about Romney’s ever changing policies? I don’t see the Romney that won the first debate having much in common with “severe conservative” Romney.
@matt:
You’re thinking too much and expecting consistency where there won’t be any. Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today: updated daily.
@michael reynolds: You have too much free time. You should take another book writing advance.
@jan:
How would you know Jan? Did you read it in the ipso facto poll?
On topic: young voters have lost their enthusiasm because experience has trumped Hope. Reality has crushed their fantasy.
Off topic: the question “can we afford tax cuts” is innately flawed and dishonest.
@David M:
Of course single payer healthcare in the U.S. would probably end up like large urban school districts. There would be a separate, private system for the elite; a poorly run, low pay, make work system for the poor and middle class, and the upper middle class trapped between spending money on boutique medicine or tolerating poor care.
Do you really want the federal government deciding whether you get a cancer therapy or not? Do you really want to turn healthcare into a career field such as public school teachers?
Well, thank god we don’t have anything like that now….!
@superdestroyer:
Absolutely not. I’d rather have the inaccessible, shadowy bureaucrats at Aetna do it. At least with Aetna, I know that they’re deciding based on their own selfish economic self-interest, that every dollar they spend on cancer therapy for me is a dollar less in profit for them….
@Rafer Janders:
And the really, really scary bit is that we have to endure it longer than American’s live to enjoy their health care paradise – the evil totalitarian health care system keeps us on average alive longer than Americans, despite us dying in the halls of hospitals desperately clammering for medical attention after being run over by buses, or crushed by 16 ton weights.
The single payer system in Canada isn’t perfect, I’d prefer a system like in France or Switzerland which has a private option on top of the public one (best of both worlds). But having lived with both American and Canadian systems, I’d take the Canadian system hands down. Even conservatives up here don’t want to get rid of the public system, they only want to add private options. No one thinks a purely private system works – and BTW, Canada had that until the 60’s. It was dropped because it was a disaster.
@jan:
Something that has never troubled you, eh Jan?
The stupid… it hurts.
As a further comment, the Canadian system isn’t as good as some of its fans in the US claim (its not great for optional care for instance). But its far better than its critics in the US say. I’ve been in a very serious car accident up here, and, believe it or not, got immediate and very competent care. Straight into the emergency ward, immediately operated on – its why I’m alive to comment (some of you might not think that’s a good thing). Reports of Canadians dying because of lack of care are just silly – the hospital halls aren’t filled with the corpses of those who died because they were ignored by staff.
A look at life expectancies should be enough to convince you of that. If we really had a bad system, if the government really was flipping a dice to decide if you lived or died, our life expectancy would be considerably lower than in the US. On the other hand, I know people who’ve had to wait three months for hip replacement surgery (not for a crushed pelvis, which gets immediate care, but for pain), and for things like that a private option would be nice.
France or Switzerland or Germany have I think the best systems.
@george:
You… you…. You…. You… SOSHULIST!!!
😉
@george:
Many Americans have to wait three months for hip replacement surgery until they can get it approved by their insurance companies.
And for those Americans without insurance, the wait time for hip replacement surgery isn’t three months, it’s forever — they will never have that surgery because they can’t afford it.
@george:
Three months for hip surgery? That’s nothing. A Canadian friend of mine had to wait nine months to deliver her baby.
@george:
I had an Aunt and Uncle who owned a resort island in Ontario for 20+ yrs. When they sold it and retired, they returned to the place of their heart in Wyoming… And twice a year made the pilgrimage to Canada for some more of that awful Canadian health care. My uncle lived into his 80’s and my aunt to her late 90’s.
But that would be going down the path of Europe, we can’t have that!
My wife is from Spain. Her mother has had breast cancer, leukemia, and 2 heart attacks. Twice my wife has had to make emergency flights home for the deathbed watch. The woman just refuses to die. As of right now she is able to live at home (severe vertigo) because her doctor comes to see her once a month, a nurse comes to see her once a week, and every other day someone comes to bathe her etc…So Spain’s is pretty good too.
@Rafer Janders: HA!
@george:
I can’t comment on Germany or Switzerland but I wholly agree regarding France. And I don’t even care for France.
a href=”#comment-1629135″>superdestroyer:
So, basically, your nightmare scenario, what you fear happening most of all….is exactly what we have now.
@superdestroyer: Yes, it would be so much worse than having a private company deciding that because you had acne medicine back when you were 15 and forgot about it that it has a perfect right to kick you to the curb.
Do you honestly think that private enterprise is going to be any better at covering health expenses? As soon as you get cancer or any other expensive disease, they’re going to run around to try to find a reason to throw you out. Why do you think the whole support for the ADA got started?
@grumpy realist:
Yes, because Freedom!, that’s why.
@michael reynolds: So when faced with this fiscal problem, what does Obama do?
Cut spending? Rein in the budget? Take control?
Nope. Spends and borrows more.
And don’t give me any bullshit about “well we can’t cut spending now, we’re in a recession! We need moar stimulus!” Look around you: four years of billions in stimulus has done nothing but put this country even more in debt. It hasn’t given us any jobs (look at labor participation rates). It’s done precisely jack.
I’m not a fan of Romney. I’m not voting for Romney. I wasn’t a fan of Bush either. I’m a libertarian. But for the love of What-Have-You, stop ranting and yelling about Bush, when he’s been out of office for four years, and your guy has done absolutely jack shit. Yes, you can certainly say “Well, we were given these problems,” but then do something with them. You can’t bitch about the other guy forever.
@Jeremy: You can’t bitch about the other guy forever.
I’ll take that bet, sir. They can, and they will.
@Jeremy:
The deficit doesn’t really change much from year to year, but it has dropped while Obama has been President. The stimulus certainly created jobs, the lowering of the labor participation is a completely separate issue. Even if you didn’t like the stimulus, it wasn’t part of the long term deficit. Don’t forget that Obamacare reduces the deficit.
Recoveries after recessions caused by a financial crisis are typically slower anyway, so there’s not really a good argument to be made that things aren’t going well.
@David M: The deficit has consistently been over a trillion a year.
The jobs from the stimulus cost a huge amount on a per-job basis, and large numbers of them were temporary. Plus, I think they also included the Census workers in those numbers.
All we’re doing is looking at what Obama promised, and noting that he hasn’t even come close to performing as promised.
Mate that’s just nonsense. No matter what economic theory you adhere to and how you set the multiplier you just can’t pour billions in additional demand into an economic system without getting results (= more jobs).
One can debate the questions whether it’s the best possible idea or whether doing nothing or doing it differently might in the end give better results for the investment but this “It’s done precisely jack” nonsense is just right-wing boilerplate without any grounding in reality.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
It was always going to be over a trillion a year, regardless of who took office in 2009.
Looking at the “cost per job” is useless and even if the jobs were temporary, they were needed at the time.
Yes, the recession in 2008/2009 was worse than anyone expected. What’s your point?
Where I live, the stimulus has funded three critical, long delayed transportation infrastructure projects. Beyond the immediate benefits, these will benefit a few million people on a daily basis for the next 75 years or so. And since the economy here is important to the country as a whole, the benefits go beyond local or regional.
Its kind a moronic point really. Can you do no better?
The headline from the original post:
The companion headline based on the comments:
@anjin-san: All Eric would need at that point is one in the chamber (or take govt help).
Perhaps you would care to share with us the information about what country has ever recovered from a recession by imposing austerity measures…
I assume you are ticked off at the American people too, as most of them continue to blame our economic problems on Bush…oh, and as for doing something about those problems, that might be a little difficult with a Republican majority in the House and the filibuster in the Senate, both being used as weapons to make sure this President only serves one term…
Nice headline, but I doubt those people will be more bitter, more delusional, more condescending, or more enraged than you will be when the President wins re-election…