Are We Better Off? No — so look for more empty Obama promises
September 05, 2012 12:05 AM | 1514 views | 17 17 comments | 9 9 recommendations | email to a friend | print
A standard line of political attack in economically troubled times has been this question, first sprung by Ronald Reagan in his successful 1980 campaign against President Jimmy Carter: “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”

It is hardly a secret Republican weapon. The GOP invoked it repeatedly at the party’s convention last week in Tampa — and just so the point wouldn’t be lost, Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan showed up Monday in North Carolina, the state now hosting the Democrats, to charge: “The president can say a lot of things, and he will, but he can’t tell you you’re better off.”

“The Jimmy Carter years look like the good old days compared to where we are right now,” Ryan said.

The tightly organized and disciplined Team Obama, which had to know the question was coming, was curiously unprepared with an answer.

On Sunday, Obama’s backers fumbled the question. On “Face the Nation,” Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley said, “No, but that’s not the question of this election.” It may not be the question, but it’s certainly one of them.

On Fox, top Obama strategist David Axelrod offered this less-than-ringing defense: “We’re in a better position than we were four years ago in our economy.”

But by the beginning of the week, the Obama campaign seemed to have regained its footing. O’Malley — no doubt having been read the riot act by Team Obama’s enforcers — had rethought his position, concluding, “We are clearly better off as a country because we’re now creating jobs rather than losing them.”

Yes, but we haven’t been creating them as fast as we’ve been losing them. And that’s the heart of the problem.

Vice President Joe Biden, a stranger to understatement, boomed at a union rally: “You want to know whether we’re better off? I’ve got a little bumper sticker for you: Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive.” Alive, yes, but only thanks to a government takeover by Obama.

All of this is a little in the nature of preseason exhibition politics. Americans like their presidential candidates to be optimistic and forward looking. On Thursday night, as he accepts his renomination, President Barack Obama must answer a different and more important variation of that question: Can he convincingly promise us that we’ll be better off four years from now than we are today?

As we saw in 2008, and since, Barack Obama can and will promise the moon, and millions of Americans will gullibly swallow those promises. But when it comes to acting on them, well, that’s a different story entirely.
Comments
(17)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Timus
|
September 07, 2012
The only things empty are you guys heads!! The President added 4.5 million jobs from the time the "free-fall" stopped. That's big! We're still adding jobs. That's big! We killed our no one enemy. That's big! Maybe we don't all agree on healthcare which I think 90% of all this negativity is about but we are heading the right direction. To turn the reigns over to a guy who wants to roll back regulations and let his billionaire buddies wreck the economy all over again is idiotic!! Trickle down theory just does worked. It never has. If you think so explain why when Bush gave them this big deficit busting tax cut in 2003 it never created any jobs? It didn't create any then. It's not creating any now. We'd be foolish to think giving the rich even more tax cuts is going to create a single job.
Jobs Numbers
|
September 10, 2012
You do realize that job growth is not keeping up with the population and that fewer people are employed today than when Obama took office, right? You do understand that President Bush actually started office with a recession as well and turned it around, right? You do know that he then had 9/11 to deal with, right? You get the housing crisis had nothing to do with tax cuts, right? You do understand as well that the jobs President Obama has "created" are mostly low paying and there's a giant segment of people who are underemployed right? Go watch Anderson Cooper on CNN. That's hardly a right wing guy.
CobbCoGuy
|
September 06, 2012
Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

The Democrats cite macroeconomic statistics (monthly job losses then vs. now) and such memes as Osama is dead and GM is alive. That's fine.

Bring the question down to a personal level.

Are you paying more for gas now? What about groceries? Your power bill? What about the value of your home? Are you one of the unfortunate ones who is upside down in their mortgage? Do you have a 401k account? Has it recovered from the 2008-2009 market collapse? Do you HAVE a job? If so, when was the last time you received a raise?

And to the "old military guy", thank you for your service; however, the Republicans are not heartless. We just believe that giving is best handled, more efficiently handled, at the local level through churches and communities. It is very inefficient for the government to confiscate tax dollars, launder those dollars through massive bureacracies, only to be doled out to favored constituencies.

In other news, why were some (maybe half?) of the Democrats booing the placement of the word "God" back into their platform?
Yep.
|
September 10, 2012
Nice, CobbCoGuy.
Tyler Durden
|
September 06, 2012
carter-

it's amazing, and telling, how you equate the less fortunate to criminals. That's not simplistic at all. When I say less fortunate I'm talking about people like me, that needed those 'socialist' programs like the GI Bill and student loans to get an eduation. I'm talking about my Mom, who was a single Mom and for a short time had to use food stamps to feed us.

And, by the way, I don't have to 'turn on the news' to see crimnals, I've been in law enforcment for 14 years. But, heck, according to Romney, we need less public servants anyway...so I'm sure you think I'm 'sucking the life' out of the gov't as well.

Mike the mayor
|
September 05, 2012
They boh suck but Romney sucks less than the anointed one Barry Obama
Kevin Foley
|
September 05, 2012
Eight years ago today we were hearing the first rumblings of the coming economic collapse brought about by 8 failed years of GOP policies. In Septmber 2008 alone the economy lost nearly 500,000 jobs. Are we better off today?

Yes.
one eye
|
September 05, 2012
Historians forget that had Clinton remained in office, the recession that had begun would have materialized. Because the recession did not have a chance to grow, Bush is not given the deserved credit for stopping the recession. His tax cuts put money back into the peoples pockets, The second term the RNC began to take control, then the Democrats won the the election, and Bush got the blame. The RNC will never take the heat they deserve, unfortunately they control the money and politics.
KennesawJay
|
September 05, 2012
Bush invaded Iraq for no reason and cost the US nearly $1 trillion dollars (yes trillion). Iraq is still not stable. 4000 soldiers died. And, we still have not found any weapons.

Bush left this country in a Depression (we called it a recession to make people feel better).

Bush was unable to end socialist programs like Social Security, Welfare, medicare, medicaid and actually added the largest socialist program for prescription drugs.

The stock market has increased by more than 100% since 2008. Therefore, Romney has seen an incredible increase in income and is much better off now. That's why he refuses to release his tax returns.

Romney installed Obamacare first (before he was against it). He's the father of universal healthcare.

Romney raised taxes as Governor. That's not conservative.

Romney left his state in debt. That's not conservative...well maybe it is...i.e. George Bush.

I'm amazed at how ignorant voters are. 65% of the people on entitlement programs are white or caucasian, not Black. Look at the stats. Why didn't George Bush end these entitlement programs during his 8 years?

Why don't conservatives close government (public) schools? These are socialist programs.

The hypocrisy is sickening.
wishful thinking
|
September 05, 2012
Read the liberal comments and I must say, wish they would get some new "talking points". The "old military guy" would have you believe that Republicans want to kick the sick, the homeless, the poor little babies, out into the cold,without a backward glance. Oh, by the way, why do none of the talking points bring up how the dems agree with murder, that is, partial birth abortion?
KennesawJay
|
September 05, 2012
Killing hundreds of thousands in war is murder. What's the difference between killing innocent civilians and abortions?
tyler durden
|
September 07, 2012
interesting post...I recall watching the republican primary debates and, when asked a pundit asked the question about whether or not a 25 yr old man without insurance should be left to die rather than have tax dollars pay for his health care the resounding answer was yes...and the republican crowd actually cheered (see it for yourself here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7kgO7lFA4) I don't read talking points. I am simply informed.

I am also pro-choice. It's funny how much the repubs care about the fetus, but care nothing about the poor, uninsured child once its born...just sayin'...
rjsnh
|
September 05, 2012
Presidential historians rate the Bush presidency as the worst in American history. Until those of you on the right admit the existence of GW Bush, it is hard to take anything you say seriously. And, yes, we are in a far better position today than when the failed presidency of Bush ended. That was, remember when, our economy and financial system was on the verge of collapse. THAT is where you want to "take our country back"...no thanks, I want to keep moving forward.
Ole Man
|
September 05, 2012
I don't know which historians claim Bush to be tyhe worse president, but I do know from first hand experience that Jimmy Carter has been the worse President the US has ever had. Our current President is giving Jimmy a good run as to which will be the worse President ever.
Historians?
|
September 05, 2012
G W Bush's place in history has yet to be determined. If you pay attention to Democrats, he's still in the race.
Tyler Durden
|
September 05, 2012
Of course Ryan and Romney have to attack Carter. Any member of a party that so loudly trumpets their successes and takes complete credit, believing they never had any help, and then actually mocks those that feel like government should assist the less fortunate is cold, craven, and prideful.

I’m an old military guy, I was taught to ‘never leave a man behind.’ I’ve learned that to be a republican is to believe in the opposite of that charge. To be a republican is to swallow Ayn Rand’s immature, drug store philosophy and, instead of helping the less fortunate, stepping on them on the way up the ladder.

HUMILITY —-GOOGLE IT GOP.
cartersucks
|
September 05, 2012
Tyler, I'm all for helping the 'less fortunate', but what about all the lazy slobs who are sucking the life out of freebies without any intention of ever going to work?! Just turn on the Atlanta local news each day and feast your eyes. My personal favorite yesterday was the cops are looking for the couple who are pulling armed robberies while pushing their infant in a stroller. Check out ajc.com and see the black couple and the baby, who has no hope for a bright future. You can't miss her. She's huge, bright red hair and smoking a cigarette. Shame on her. She stands there while her man holds a gun to the head of a helpless victim and robs them. Robs them of the things that they are WORKING FOR. Catch my drift?!
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, spam, and links to outside websites will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides