Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Day of the Demagogues
As the results of New Hampshire’s primary were coming in Tuesday night, some commentators on Twitter were jubilant about the “disruption” the victories of an inane socialist demagogue and a foul-mouthed nationalist demagogue represented to the “establishment.” Yes, mobs are disruptive. Madame DeFarge enjoyed a good shakeup herself.
Senator Bernie Sanders believes that eight years of the most leftist president in American history have left the plutocrats in total control. Channeling the late Hugo Chavez, he promises to lift the minimum wage to $15 per hour, provide free college educations for all, and deliver universal health care (with only a small tax on the middle class). How will he pay for it? “With a tax on Wall Street speculation.”
Now, I’m no particular fan of Wall Street, but this is rubbish. Sanders bellows: “The greed, the recklessness, and the illegal behavior drove our economy to its knees. The American people bailed out Wall Street, now it’s Wall Street’s time to help the middle class.” Without defending bailouts (and if you want an excellent history of how the government encouraged risky behavior by bankers, see “Gambling with Other People’s Money” by Russ Roberts), let’s remember that in 2008 the banks were given loans, not bailouts, and the purpose was not to support billionaires but to head off what Congress had reason to fear was a total freeze up of the financial system. Maybe they were wrong, but Congress was genuinely terrified that without a quick infusion of government money, there could be a full scale liquidity crisis, i.e., when you and I went to our ATMs, we’d get an error message.
If you’ll indulge another objection to the greedy-bankers-robbing-the-middle-class tale, the banks paid back the “bailout” money (with interest) as Jim Geraghty of National Review reminds us. Further, while you’ll never hear this from Bolshy Bernie, it wasn’t private greed that created the financial crisis but government coercion and incentives that encouraged lending to “non-traditional” (i.e., non-creditworthy) customers. There’s more to say on this, like the fact that many of those sainted middle class victims of the financial crisis were actually house flippers who made risky bets. That’s not to say many innocent people were not hurt. But spare us these black/white morality tales. Oh, and Sen. Sanders: Even if you confiscated all of the wealth of America’s “billionaire class” (what a ridiculous term for a few hundred individuals), you wouldn’t come close the $17 trillion in new spending you’ve proposed.
Meanwhile, the Dodd/Frank bill that was supposed to be the cure for what went wrong in 2008 — the bill the Democratic House and Senate passed and Obama signed — it’s a big cause of our anemic growth now. The big banks have done okay with the thousands upon thousands of new regulations. In fact, they’ve gotten even bigger. But medium and small banks, the ones who typically finance new ventures and thus create new job opportunities, are going under. The ones that remain are actually discouraging new deposits. That’s right. They can’t lend out the money because of the strictures of Dodd/Frank, so they don’t want new money. An employee at one of the surviving banks told me that she now spends about 30 percent of her time on Dodd/Frank compliance. What would she have done with that time otherwise? “Helped our clients to become more efficient.” Businesses that are more efficient are more profitable. More profits equal more employment. Profits — shhh, don’t upset the Democrats — are good.
Not that the leading contender for the Republican nomination grapples with any of these questions. Like Sanders, he’s not interested in reform so much as looking for scapegoats. Sanders blames greedy billionaires for the problems of the middle class and the poor; Trump blames treacherous immigrants, crafty foreigners, and incompetent leadership in Washington. Some people seemed surprised that there was overlap between Sanders and Trump supporters, but it makes perfect sense.
Some commentators on the right, particularly on talk radio, have ridden the hobby horse of immigration very hard — even to the point of welcoming Trump’s rise as a ratification of their fixation. But in Iowa, immigration was rated important by only 13 percent of GOP caucus participants. In New Hampshire, only 15 percent said it was important to their vote. Terrorism, government spending, and the economy all ranked higher.
Trump and Sanders are disruptive, and people who welcome chaos for its own sake are dangerous. The Founders of this country were extremely wary of excessive power — whether in an executive or in a mob. They designed the system to be stable and somewhat resistant to every shift in public mood, and it has served us very well. But the voters are the ultimate custodians of the American system, and by turning to demagogues in both parties, they’ve ventured into scary terrain.
Published in General
I wonder what the people who don’t believe in math have to say about climate change.
What a superb title for this post!
If Barney Frank were in prison for helping to create the 2008 meltdown, I’d feel a lot better about demonizing those who played the game according to the rules Congress created.
The Founders of this country were extremely wary of excessive power — whether in an executive or in a mob.
Then they would be aghast at the presidency and congress as presently constituted, and the suppurating and corrosive bureaucratic monstrosity they have sired.
That’s right Mona. Rubio dropped all due to a debate brain freeze. His immigration stance/s have nothing to do with it. Wrap yourself up in that warm blanket of delusion.
It was Christie’s fault. It’s Bush’s fault. I suspect you’ll continue to mutter that nonsense in a post non-Marco nomination stupor.
I share your dislike of Trump and hope to see him defeated but an honest assessment of where the majority of GOP voters and ‘persuadables’ – starts with an acknowledgement of their concerns and grievances, not continued denigration.
Unfortunately, our government is still pushing banks to lend to non-creditworthy customers. When the new bubble the government is creating bursts, who will Bernie and company blame? You can bet it won’t be Washington.
WI Con,
I must have missed the column in which Mona – wrapped in a warm blanket of delusion – blamed Rubio, Christie, and Bush; it sure wasn’t this one. Please provide a link. Thanks.
They will blame bankers and Wall Street. Why give up a winning formula?
Immigration, immigration, immigration. “Dey took our jerbs!”
Strange how New Hampshire Trumpians are so concerned about immigration, even though no immigrants live there, but we in Texas don’t seem to care.
Scare, scapegoat, fearmonger. But hey, you reap what you saw Republicans. 8 years of screaming that the world was going to burn any day now, leads to this. Now deal with the 35% of the “conservative” base that thinks a Vladimir Putin impersonator is what America needs.
[Editors’ note: This comment was flagged. The editors agree that the tone could hypothetically be insulting to all Republicans as a group, but that seems to us over-sensitive: it’s not personally directed at another member of Ricochet. “Some” Republicans would be a more specific phrasing, admittedly.]
There’s no delusion involved there. Rubio’s immigration stances didn’t hurt him in New Hampshire, two guys with softer immigration stances than Rubio finished ahead of him for heavens sake. If the softer immigration stance that Kasich, Bush, and Rubio all basically share had coalesced behind a single candidate, that candidate would have gotten 38% of the vote and beaten Trump.
What’s more Trump isn’t necessarily winning people because of his immigration stance, the exit polls showed him winning over 20% of the voters who actually favor some form of legalization for illegal immigrants. The hardline immigration hawks are the ones who need to reassess the importance of immigration and how much that is fueling the Trump phenomenon. Because they are getting a bit out over their skis I would submit.
Rubio’s debate performance definitely was what cost him a strong second place showing and the momentum he needed to consolidate the center-right vote quickly. The polls clearly showed him in a solid 2nd place on Saturday before the debate, with Kasich close behind. By Monday he was plummeting. Emerson reported that the numbers they got for Rubio on Monday were 9% vs. 17% on Saturday. ARG reported a drop from 17% to 12% from Saturday to Monday.
Her last column telling Bush to get out of the race.
Has she considered writing a column to Rubio, letting him know that there’s a sizable portion of the GOP electorate that doesn’t believe him on immigration?
A couple months ago the polling said Texas did care about illegal immigration.
http://www.texastribune.org/2015/11/17/uttt-poll-immigration-terror-greatest-threats-us/
I understand that you are just going to call Trump’s supporters names and continue to make weird references to Putin, but I thought other people might want to know that you don’t speak for all of Texas.
And Kasich and Bush are going to get the nomination? Hey, I’m trying to tell you guys one of the main issues holding people back from your candidate. He’ll be easier to beat if he doesn’t change – great! Marco, change nothing.
Strange, I seem to recall a certain former governor…well a couple actually…being thrown off stage by true “conservatives” due to their stance on immigration.
Instead of percentage trends and shifts consider these facts:
Marco Rubio said 4 times during the debate that Obama was not incompetent, that instead Obama was carrying out a conscious plan that would fundamentally transform this country.
Comprehensive immigration reform was Obama’s #1 second term domestic priority. His entire party supported it to a man.
Marco Rubio was the chief Republican proponent of Comprehensive Immigration Reform. And he voted for the Senate bill, along with every Democrat.
What does that make Marco Rubio – liar, dupe, schizo or opportunist?
That realization is what turned people away from him…and will continue to.
End this unprecedented 50-year experiment. Stop immigration now.
Dey took our jerbs!
First off, I’m pretty sure immigration has been going on for a lot longer than 50 years.
Second, I’m pretty sure there have been more Mexicans leaving the US, then entering it, for a few years now.
Third, has it occurred to you that maybe Rubio is acting on his principles when supporting the immigration plan? [redacted]
Fourth, do you think it is possible to have the same stance as Obama on an issue? Is that physically, or philosophically possible? If Obama says he likes strawberry ice cream, is the only acceptable “conservative” position to say you don’t like it?
[Redacted]
[Editors’ note: This comment was flagged, we’ve redacted two sentences as sarcastic and thus likely to detract from the seriousness of the question, rather than promote a well-intentioned exchange of ideas.]
This is really adding a lot to the discussion.
Ricochet for intelligent civil conversation.
Isn’t that Donald Trump’s campaign slogan?
Seriously now, Trump insults everyone left and right. Us RINOs have been called liars, traitors, scoundrels, sons of terrible mothers and much worst by his “base”. But now, a sentence which accurately and faithfully represents the political position of Donald Trump, is not civil? Give me a break.
Not real sure what this has to do with polling data that contradicts your opinion that Texas does not care about illegal immigration.
Well, come to Texas and see. We care about border security (which that question in the poll asked). We don’t mind Mexicans. Which is Turmp’s platform. Different things, these two.
Those former Texas governors also thought that “immigration” was a top concern. But for different reasons, and had different ideas of how to solve it, than those concerned citizens in New Hampshire who voted for Trump.
Speak for yourself, kemosabe.
Why Trump is winning, in one sentence.
Right back atcha’!
We sure agree on that.
The RINOs are reaping what they’ve sown. Bon appétit.
You’re going to be eating those words when Hillary Clinton becomes president for the next 8 years. No sane moderate is ever going to vote GOP after this.
A much better post than usual from this source. I’ll quibble with this last paragraph, of course.
The founders of this country were disruptive, and used some chaos to navigate us at some peril out of scary terrain. The Founders were literally the demagogues back then, and those who defended the system as it was applied at the time were propping up an excessively powerful regime, no matter what its proud heritage.
Sounds like Ms. Charen is starting to see (or admit) what is going on. America, in both parties, is sick and tired of Washington DC, in both parties. Claire put it artfully — each side began by chortling at the other side’s candidates, and wound up horrified at their own.
Doesn’t this rather make the case for the establishment/base divide rather than paint Texas as pro-amnesty? Perry got a Mulligan on some of his “border issues”, but his “heart” comment is why a single bad debate got him a divorce in 2012.
Stunning economic ignorance?
Let me just register a quick pro forma objection.
You don’t adhere to conservative principles so we will support a man without any!
Makes sense.