[WS:] Maybe, but Repugs seem to get a far greater mileage out of it than Dems. And they do it on issues that have zero impact on everyday life of most Americans, e.g. taxes on the wealthy, gay rights, or government deficit.
As to the reason why Obama admin failed to punch back - I agree with your point on being subservient to wall street etc., but rhetoric and reality are two different things. They could be subservient and publicly bash them - repugs do it all the time. I think it is due, in large part, to Dem reliance on punditocracy and Repug reliance on gut political instinct. The former can only produce a wishy washy blah, the latter - a spirited rhetoric which carries the day.
Wojtek
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Marv Gandall <marvgandall at videotron.ca> wrote:
>
> On 2010-10-11, at 10:50 AM, Wojtek S wrote:
>
>> So the bottom line is that if Obama administration or its supporters
>> engaged in a massive public relations blitz, the "average US citizen"
>> would view this administration as "going in the right direction."
>> However, they chose not to - for reasons that remain a mystery to me -
>> thus ceding ground to the right wing noise machine. Consequently, the
>> "average US citizens," parroting what is being broadcast at them,
>> call Obama "socialist" and similar nonsense. the bottom line is that if Obama administration or its supporters
>> engaged in a massive public relations blitz, the "average US citizen"
>> would view this administration as "going in the right direction."
>> However, they chose not to - for reasons that remain a mystery to me -
>> thus ceding ground to the right wing noise machine. Consequently, the
>> "average US citizens," parroting what is being broadcast at them,
>> call Obama "socialist" and similar nonsense.
>
>
> A massive public relations blitz will only get you so far. The administration has lost the strong public support it had at the beginning of its term not solely or even primarily because of a failure to communicate, but because most people have seen no measurable benefit to themselves from its tepid healthcare, jobs, and housing initiatives, have resented instead the largesse bestowed on bankers who have continued to reward themselves lavishly, and are terrified those "wasted trillions" will "mortgage their children" and lead to large tax increases they can ill afford.
>
> It's simply not the case that the average US citizen rejects Obama because he is a socialist and similar nonsense. The frenzied Republican base may have persuaded itself that this first black President is a Kenyan Muslim Marxist, but this is not true of most independents and most certainly not of Democrats who by themselves outnumber Republicans in the country. The grievances of Americans are the ones mentioned above, which will explain why many disappointed Democratic supporters will stay home and many independents will vote against Democratic incumbents in the forthcoming elections.
>
> The reason why the Obama administration has declined to punch back at the Republicans is not as much of a mystery to me as it is to you. The party leadership is more susceptible to pressure from Wall Street than from its working class base, and has become ever more so in conjunction with the decades-long decline of the industrial unions. This is not a phenomenon unique to the US; the same historic process has accompanied the full integration into the system of the European social democratic parties. Moreover, unlike the 30s, the bourgeoisie does not feel the same urgent need to reform the system and to boost the purchasing power of American workers because corporate profitability has not declined during the present downturn but has, in fact, been buoyed by strong overseas sales into China and the other emerging markets to which the US and other multinationals have increasingly turned.
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>