Political Animal
Blog
There’s a lingering disconnect in most public opinion polls. When pollsters ask Americans what they consider to be the top issues facing the country, the American mainstream strongly agrees with the Democratic line: job creation and economic growth are paramount, and the deficit isn’t that important.
But when pollsters ask Americans about the deficit itself, the American mainstream tends to agree with the Republican line. The new Bloomberg News poll shows the public adopting all kinds of odd GOP talking points, from inspiring “confidence” through spending cuts to the deficit making the economy “unstable.”
In other words, the public broadly believes in what Paul Krugman refers to as the “confidence fairy,” i.e., the notion that deficit cutting is an important component in restoring “economic confidence,” a notion that even the White House has endorsed. It also agrees with the GOP’s argument that excessive regulation and taxes create “uncertainty.”
Greg goes on to explain that the public may have “internalized the idea that government is a massive drag on the economy and can’t possibly create jobs,” in part because Republicans have been effective getting their ridiculous message out, and in part because Dems have been so inept in fighting back against the bogus argument.
Jonathan Bernstein has a related point that also rings true.
My comment, once again, is that I simply don’t believe that most people have any idea what “deficit” means. Or, rather, what “deficit” means to them is basically some version of “bad economic stuff.” I very much doubt that when mass publics answer survey questions about the deficit that what they think of is the difference between government revenues and government expenditures. Well, maybe some do — but at least in my view, many, perhaps most, don’t.
I’m sure everyone has heard this anecdote a hundred times, but I often think about one of the 1992 presidential candidate debates, at which a young voter asked, “[H]ow has the national debt personally affected each of your lives? And if it hasn’t, how can you honestly find a cure for the economic problems of the common people if you have no experience in what’s ailing them?”
President George H.W. Bush was first, and answered the question directly, talking about interest rates. The questioner wasn’t impressed, and talked about “friends that have been laid off in jobs.” Bush responded, “I’m not sure I get it. Help me with the question, and I’ll try to answer it.”
Bill Clinton had no such trouble. He realized that the woman said the “deficit,” but she was really just talking about the economy in general. Bush took the question literally, not realizing that the questioner didn’t know what the deficit even is.
My hunch is, public ignorance has gotten worse in the 20 years since. It’s fairly common to hear people say, “People are really struggling out there, so we better get the deficit under control.” They don’t realize — because no one in power has told them — that tackling the deficit would make matters worse, not better, for those hurting most.
And so the polls, the discourse, and the political world slide further down the rabbit hole.
Facebook
Twitter
SaintZak on June 22, 2011 2:15 PM:
The American people believe it because it's the only message being presented to them.
c u n d gulag on June 22, 2011 2:17 PM:
Well, what would anyone expect after 30 years of "The Reagan Devolution" and the "Government = Bad" propaganda, hammered and hammered and hammered at every opportunity, but that it has sunk in?
Especially when we have weak, feckless and cowardly Democrats who sure know the way to Wall Street, but no longer remember where Main Street is.
This current crop of Democrats needs be thrown out of office, be consigned to the dustbin of history,* and be restocked with REAL Democrats.
Except the alternative is Republican rule for a while. And I'm not sure we can survive even a few years of that.
But, I'm also afraid that we're about to find out...
*Just like CAPTCHA.
kevo on June 22, 2011 2:22 PM:
Economic policies and successes are not emotionally sexed with conflict the way politics is, and as such, if one wishes to use our slumping economy as a political tool, one merely has to politicize it, and political gain should be right around the corner!
Economic reality - each dollar spent on extending umemployment beyond the pay-in 99 weeks, and each dollar spent on government sponsored food coupons to be used by the needy puts approximately $1.61 back into the economy by increasing immediate demand. Our economy needs policies like these if it wants to seriously climb out of the economic hole it made when Bush-led-Republicans gutted our revenue streams and let loose needed regulation to keep Wall Street as honest as any external force is capable!
Political reality - scapegoat the unemployed and the needy as lazy and drugged addled to capture an emotional ferver and effectively use such ferver as a divining-rod for the next election cycle, instead of promoting economic policies that would actually work for the better! Then, pinpoint (sell) the actual obstruction as if it's an ineffective chief executive who needs to be unseated in 2012 and you have what may be an effective strategy for an unassuming electorate.
So there you have it, a group of elected officials (read Republicans) who see political expediency in helping our tanked economy stay where it is for the next 1 1/2 years!
I count those types as traitors to my beloved free and liberty-minded American citizeny. I only pray my fellow Americans won't get hoodwinked again as they were with the slogan, "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
Oh, and speaking of the last election cycle strategy put forth by our Republican brethren,
Where are the Jobs? -Kevo
Daryl McCullough on June 22, 2011 2:30 PM:
We can blame this on Republican propaganda, but we should also place the blame on liberals for failing to come up with an explanation of their policies that intuitively makes sense to ordinary people.
The Republican argument resonates with people's intuitive understanding of economics in their own lives: When times are tough, you cut back on spending. If you routinely, month after month, run up more debt (on your credit cards, say), then it will eventually catch up with you, and when that happens, it will be a disaster.
So the Republican message is an easier sell. If the Democrats are going to make any headway in changing public attitudes, they must come up with explanations for their policies that resonate as strongly as the Republican messages.
Okie on June 22, 2011 2:52 PM:
A lie repeated often enough becomes truth. - Lenin
Steve LaBonne on June 22, 2011 3:42 PM:
Obama works and speaks for the rentiers, so of course he's going to reinforce their favorite talking points instead of fighting them. The same is true of most Dem Congresscritters.
dalloway on June 22, 2011 3:52 PM:
Exactly right! Republicans have successfully painted budget deficits as a large (liberal) boot on the neck of the economy. I suggest Democrats paint Republicans as the brick wall standing between Americans and help for their problems. Mr. and Mrs. Voter -- tear down this wall!
FlipYrWhig on June 22, 2011 3:55 PM:
I know _you_ know this already, but there are plenty of real-world household-economics analogues for what to do if you're in debt. F'rinstance, when times are tough and you cut back on new spending, you still might do something like pay the minimum on your credit card rather than trying to pay off the whole thing at once. And when times are tough, you still are pretty likely to try to get a student loan to send your kid to college, because you can't pay for it out of pocket but you know that it's going to be good for the kid in the long run.
My theory continues to be that "The Deficit" is a bogeyman representing the government being too lavish. "We have to cut The Deficit" means "We have to stop doling out goodies to people," and, as a corollary, "If we don't stop doling out goodies to people, ordinary folks are going to have to pay higher taxes to support that, and that's not fair." "The Deficit" means "overly generous support for people who don't deserve it." Think of the rhetoric against public employees, the talk of healthcare reform as "entitlements," etc. When people say they're worried about The Deficit, what they're worried about is future higher taxes for themselves, going towards supporting someone else's unsustainably cushy life.
That's why survey respondents will say that they want the government to do more to help create jobs, but also say that they want the government to cut spending. They don't think the government spends money to create jobs. they think that the government cuts taxes, then that creates jobs, and the whole thing pays for itself--or at least it would if the government cut spending (on people who don't deserve it). They picture a giant pile of money being squandered on people who have it much too easy. Cut them off, cut my taxes, and everyone benefits.
stormskies on June 22, 2011 4:17 PM:
United Stupid Of America
USA ! USA ! USA !
zeitgeist on June 22, 2011 5:16 PM:
if "a little ignorance goes a long way" then American quantities of ignorance ought to get us that long-contemplated Mars landing and still have enough left over to replace all gasoline-powered automobiles world-wide.
Michael on June 22, 2011 6:08 PM:
his current crop of Democrats needs be thrown out of office, be consigned to the dustbin of history,* and be restocked with REAL Democrats.
Um,... I think that would be a mistake, it's not the democrats who have made us a country of idiots.
The master messengers have been at work dumbing down the country for decades.2010 was the perfect time to put their long hatched plans into action. The countries stupidity was at a fever pitch, they were able to throw out as many whacko's as they could, and a few of them even stuck.
Haveing just finished stupefying the nation with bush, and ruining the economy, they knew they'd have a tough slog with obama, but are sure they can complete their mission...
nemisten on June 22, 2011 6:11 PM:
"...in part because Republicans have been effective getting their ridiculous message out, and in part because Dems have been so inept in fighting back against the bogus argument."
My only quibble would be changing 'in part' to 'mainly'. Moreover, this applies to almost every major policy debate (the debt, taxes, health care, education, stimulus, military, war, ad nauseum) the country has been having over the last 30 years.
ameshall on June 22, 2011 6:33 PM:
Perhaps the Democrats' "triple threat" messaging strategy of wishful thinking, stony silence, and preemptive capitulation will help get the message out. Or maybe not.
Doug on June 22, 2011 8:42 PM:
Alright then, just HOW do the Democrats "get the message out"?
The old "bully pulpit" can only be used so often before it becomes "What, he's making ANOTHER speech?" And that's assuming the watcher even slows down enough to see what's actually on the channel. Nor can the President simply pre-empt programming and make a speech blasting the hell out the Republicans for the mess they made and are still conributing to - that's politics and requires MONEY for a purchase of air time. You donating? The same applies all the way down the line, from the President to local selectmen/women, council representatives, whatever. It costs MONEY to put the "message" out, so where's the money to come from?
Republicans have billionaire backers and "news" programs that are formatted to provide entertainment rather than information in their favor. They have "talk radio", where there's little "talk" and a lot of misinformation and outright lies. What do Democrats have?
Us.
Monala on June 22, 2011 9:07 PM:
FlipYrWhig, I'd add that in household economics, you don't cut back on the necessities of life (food, shelter) while trying to pay down debt. Yet it's the very necessities that Republicans are so frequently trying to cut.
But that might not resonate with many voters, given your points about people thinking such government benefits are for "other people." And if they themselves find themselves in needs of such things, well, they deserve it, unlike those "other people."