Robert Rubin: preparing us for governance?

Robert Rubin was Secretary of the Treasury from 1995 to 1999. He consuled Clinton to focus on deficit reduction and deregulation. I was struck by his article, co-authored with Jared Bernstein, this morning in the NY Times. The most important point he makes, from a psychological perspective, is that we shouldn't worry about the deficit so much, that it is a false choice between "fiscal rectitude" and "pubic investment". Since Rubin is one of Obama's closest advisers and might very well serve as Treasury Secretary again, I think this is a way of getting us ready for an Obama proposal to jumpstart the economy through a large public works program, probably centered on "green" technology, infrastructure and renewable energy. "Public Works" is something Republicans hate as a concept and I suspect most Americans view it suspiciously as well (although when the government offers jobs in a jobless economy, their views might change). But I was bemused by this "deficit hawk" now using his credibility to get the public ready for a big spending program by playing down the issue of deficits,

I was musing on the often noted fact that only a small number of the many issues that confront the next president and congress have been discussed in this campaign. Of course, there are so many that any candidate I guess could be forgiven for not wanting to overwhelm voters with too many plans. Still, I think it is strange that climate change (global warming) hasn't been addressed. Forget the economic mess we are in; if climatologists are right, the fate of the species, let alone most other species on the planet, are at stake. And what about the so-called Patriot Act, the denial of habeas corpus, the assertion of executive power in unconstitutional ways? And what about...well, I give up; too many things to add to the pile.

On the one hand, it may be about the psychology of attention. "It's the economy, stupid", the mantra from the first Clinton presidency, is a profound statement of the way in which people prioritize issues. But I'm puzzled that McCain hasn't pushed his legislation about global warming more in the campaign. Perhaps it seems too "liberal" to please his base. On the other hand, it's exactly the sort of thing that distinguishes him from Bush and wins over the hearts of Independents. Id'be interested in your thoughts on this matter.

Race , again

In the waning hours of this long campaign, race continues to be a complex, multi-dimensional issue cutting in many ways. this article reports on those people who will be voting for Obama because he is black. I like the last point. When asked if she was voting because of white guilt, the person replied, "Of course, what's wrong with guilt?" Then she explains that there is plenty for white folks about which to feel guilty. It's not an emotion we've discussed in class, but I think it bears consideration. For example, when a politician appeals to a future world in which "your children and grandchildren will live," that's inducing guilt. When, as this article suggests, Republicans ask potential Obama voters whether they are voting for a black man because of white guilt, they are trying to make white Obama voters feel guilty about feeling guilty! I'll bet you can think of other attempts to persuade based on guilt. Interesting article; worth reading.

Fazlling back on the familiar

It's interesting to me that after at least a month of trying one thing or another, John McCain seems finally to have decided on a single strategy for criticizing Obama. Ironically, it's an old strategy: to portray the Democrats as the party of "tax and spend". Never mind what Obama says about reducing middle class taxes. the McCain strategy is to say you can never trust Democrats because they will always raise your taxes to pay for their new programs. It's been a successful strategy for Republicans for a very long time (at least in my memory it goes back to the 50s). but will it work this time? Forgetting for the moment about "too little, too late", I wonder if Obama has insulated himself by openly and consistently championing tax cuts for the middle class (side note: whatever happened to the poor?) so that people are less likely to believe McCain, at least in this regard. Or does the Obama lead in the polls reflect a hardening of the narrative/image that has surfaced in the last few weeks, that McCain is angry and erratic and that Obama is calm, cool, and consistent? I think that's Brian's point in her reply to one of my posts. Do other people agree?

Falling gas prices--the October surprise?

A common heuristic that many Americans use as a measure of economic security or the lack thereof is the rise and fall of gas prices. As gas prices go up, people get increasingly anxious about their economic well-being. As they fall (as is presently now happening), people feel better about their economic situation. This is not to deny that many other factors, including the rise and fall of stock market, whether you feel your job is in jeopardy, whether you have a job, etc. don't contribute to economic anxiety. But gas prices, given the centrality of the automobile to American life, are the most visible and easily understood part of the financial mess we find ourselves in. So I wonder if this might not redound in McCain's favor. The less economic anxiety, the more other issues that would favor McCain might kick in. Well, maybe it is all too little and too late. And maybe people are smart enough to understand that gas prices are falling because the whole world is going into a recession which depresses the price of oil everywhere (i.e., when things start to turn around, gas prices will inevitably go up). But I don't know. Do you think this is a possible October surprise?

the big picture

I was thinking today that I haven't been contexualizing the study of political psychology enough. For instance, for the last 50 years, we have been a culture of consumption fueled by debt. We have let production move offshore so that we import an increasing amount of the stuff we consume from abroad. What we are left with is a service economy which is now becoming unraveled. Will we go back to our old bad ways? I don't know but maybe so. But here's the thing: what does political leadership look like in an era where we are going to be forced to make a transition in our use of energy, our financial and economic structures, our patterns of consumption and production? Can the terms, concepts, theories we use still hold as this macroenvironment changes? Don't know the answer but would be interested in your thoughts.

Is Obama boring?

This afternoon I was watching Obama on MSNBC giving a speech surrounded by his foreign policy team. He was making the general point that the current economic crisis/panic/whatever can't be separated from foreign policy and security concerns. He went on to talk in generalities about this general point and my eyes began to glaze over. Then I realized that he was talking in a not very animated voice, looking down at his notes, and generally low in energy. I noticed this "new" Obama in the first debate. Many of the commentators said that they thought that Obama was "flat" as opposed to McCain who seemed energized. Yet all the polls showed that people thought Obama had won the debate by substantial margins.

So what's going on? Where is the Obama of old, the Obama of rhetorical eloquence, of rhythmic cadence, the guy who get a crowd rocking and rolling? Where is the Obama of "yes we can" and "hope" and "change"? I have four theories:

1. Obama is a master politician who understands that what people want right now is steady, sober, calm, concerned but even low key.

2. It's been a long campaign and he's just getting tired (there's even some gray in his hair now).

3. He is suspending his campaign to fly to Hawaii to be with his beloved grandmother who mostly raised him and from whom he gets his values. So he is distracted and thinking about her as she is perhaps in her last days.

4. He's worried about Biden's "gaffe" about foreign policy and is trying to repair the damage (I think this is a stretch since I don't think there is much damage because I think most people don't care).

Well, what do you think? I'd be interested in any other theories. Or am I wrong about a change in Obama's image? (I'd hate for the old Obama to disappear from the scene entirely--he was more fun).