Nathan Newman wrote:
>Work seems to be being spread around a bit more, but the total labor needed
>still seems to have increased only modestly, and nowhere near older levels.
-The Dems have -effectively lost the economy as a campaign issue, unless they want to -take on more troublesome structural stuff like health insurance, -labor law, and the minimum wage, which may be too radioactive.
I bet against Gore based on his supposed advantages due to the economy and I'll bet against Bush, partially because the recession was too long for people to seriously give him credit for economic management. They'll recognize he blew a massive hole in the budget for pretty minimal economic gains, wages are being undermined, and people are feeling less economically secure.
And of course the Dems are talking about other issues like the minimum wage. Haven't you noticed Senate Dems pushing it right now? http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/03/politics/03CONG.html "Recently, when the Senate was debating a major welfare bill, Democrats demanded a vote on a proposal to increase the minimum wage."
Dems and other activists are also pushing state versions of the minimum wage: In CT: http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=1828212&nav=3YeXMipG In NY: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/190114p-164463c.html In NV: http://tinyurl.com/ys8eq In FL: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,118451,00.html
Why the pessimism? Activists are out there all over the country, pushing issues and expanding turnout.
Nathan Newman