From my Twitter feed (8/3-8/8)Aug 9, 2011 at 3:13 AM | |
---|---|
Powered by Keepstream | |
![]() | Obama re-elect odds now down to dead-even on Intrade - bid 50.0, ask 50.1 http://j.mp/pQeHXe (caveat: low volume) |
Time and Sales Chart - Barack Obama to be re-elected President in 2012 Show:Closing pricesTime and Sales Time Zone Europe - LondonEurope - UTC/GMTUS - Eastern TimeUS - Central TimeUS - Mountain TimeUS - Pacific TimeAsia - Hong Kong | |
Aug 9, 2011 at 1:14 AM | |
![]() | RT @jbouie: http://j.mp/qwp7XG @mattyglesias uses the case of James Monroe's administration to make a defense of political parties and partisanship. |
![]() | |
Aug 9, 2011 at 1:04 AM | |
![]() | RT @JustinWolfers: In my whole life I don't think I've ever seen the DC conventional wisdom as firmly at odds with standard textbook economics. #AusteritySucks |
Aug 9, 2011 at 12:59 AM | |
![]() | RT @abuaardvark: Maybe if Obama tells a good story today about GOP bad guys the markets will rally, jobs appear, Congress cooperate, and Asad flee Syria. |
Aug 9, 2011 at 1:15 AM | |
![]() | Overhyped: "individual state campaigns" http://j.mp/of4ToA Obama's win in 2008 was a relatively uniform swing vs Kerry '04. |
![]() | |
Aug 8, 2011 at 12:59 PM | |
![]() | Douthat on the seductive fiction of realignment: "next election may be no more transformative than 2008 turned out to be" http://j.mp/nl44uc |
![]() | |
Aug 8, 2011 at 12:56 PM | |
![]() | More on the Groseclose-Milyo media bias paper @monkeycageblog - statistical results found not to be robust http://j.mp/qZ9RNM |
More on the Groseclose-Milyo Measure of Media Bias — The Monkey Cage From a forthcoming paper by John Gasper. Find it here (pdf). | |
Aug 8, 2011 at 12:44 PM | |
![]() | The disaster of US patent law -- stories from Mark Cuban http://t.co/5lY8tRw (top 2 posts) and This American Life http://t.co/3iWQZro |
![]() | |
![]() | |
Aug 7, 2011 at 7:30 PM | |
![]() | Drew Westen the latest to say Obama's problems could be fixed w/better messaging http://j.mp/oVASY0 Highly unlikely - see http://j.mp/aFHzmJ |
![]() | |
| |
Aug 7, 2011 at 6:31 PM | |
![]() | RT @ClaytonNall: Westen in NYT: Obama shld learn from FDR's 1936 "I welcome their hatred" speech. But that speech was on 10/31/1936 w/ landslide in the bag |
Aug 7, 2011 at 6:35 PM | |
![]() | RT @kwcollins: Why does the NYT keep giving space to evidence-free claims that political fortunes would improve if leaders just said X? |
Aug 7, 2011 at 7:21 PM | |
![]() | RT @kwcollins: At no point in Westen's op-ed does he present anything resembling evidence, beyond the banal observation that narratives make good messages |
Aug 7, 2011 at 7:21 PM | |
![]() | RT @kwcollins: Westen does reference sound research on the sources of policy influence (e.g. public opinion of wealthy), but if anything ... |
Aug 7, 2011 at 7:21 PM | |
![]() | RT @kwcollins: ... that suggests that Westen's proposed fixes (Better speeches! Simple narratives! My magic paragraph!) are unlikely to change anything. |
Aug 7, 2011 at 7:21 PM | |
![]() | RT @dgardner: Nyhan on Westen, a few years ago. http://bit.ly/r2vHyB |
| |
Aug 8, 2011 at 1:08 AM | |
![]() | John Sides on Westen's op-ed: "We can learn little...from...speeches never given and the alleged character flaws implied" http://j.mp/nOZr8u |
Script Doctor — The Monkey Cage Drew Westen's indictment of Obama is right on several secondary points about public opinion, but fundamentally wrong in its portrayal of presidential power within American politics. Even though ... | |
Aug 8, 2011 at 2:22 AM | |
![]() | Yet more on flaws in Westen's piece: Mischaracterizing FDR to Indict Obama @monkeycageblog http://j.mp/n6NuVN |
Mischaracterizing FDR to Indict Obama — The Monkey Cage Part of Drew Westen's piece suggested that Obama should have followed the example of FDR: I asked Eric Schickler, a political scientist at UC-Berkeley who has done research (forthcoming) on publ... | |
Aug 8, 2011 at 10:21 PM | |
![]() | Agreed - a must-read. RT @smotus: Awesome takedown of Drew Westen's NYT piece by Chait. http://t.co/qncbecD |
Drew Westen's Nonsense | The New Republic There are some strong criticisms to be made of the Obama administration from the left, especially concerning Obama's passive response to the debt ceiling hostage crisis, and his frightening will... | |
Aug 9, 2011 at 1:12 AM | |
![]() | Agree with @mattyglesias on this - Rick Perry Is Electable Enough http://bit.ly/q46Pit |
![]() | |
Aug 5, 2011 at 1:33 AM | |
![]() | RT @GrahamDavidA: Get elected during a period of economic boom? RT @TheFix: What Barack Obama can learn from Bill Clinton. http://ow.ly/5VtuY |
![]() | |
Aug 5, 2011 at 1:22 AM | |
![]() | RT @MysteryPollster: Considering low Congressional approval, it's causes, consequences http://t.co/UaOUgyp |
![]() | |
Aug 5, 2011 at 1:17 AM | |
![]() | Extrapolation driven by 92 (banking scandal) MT @fivethirtyeight 14% Cong. app. corresponds to 90-100 House losing seats http://t.co/3HeoTNJ |
Surveying the Electoral Damage of the Debt Debate - NYTimes.com There aren't any winners here, but you can argue that Republicans have sustained more damage. | |
Aug 5, 2011 at 1:15 AM | |
![]() | RT @richardmskinner: doubt we will see '92 level of retirements - last yr members could convert campaign $ to personal use |
Aug 5, 2011 at 11:05 AM | |
![]() | RT @daveweigel: Checking in with birthers b/f Obama's birthday. They literally just changed slogan to "Where's the REAL BC?" http://slate.me/nnQ7VP |
Undead Birtherism | |
Aug 4, 2011 at 2:39 AM | |
![]() | Ray Fair forecasting Obama 53.4% based on implausible economic growth forecast http://j.mp/o9VPF7 More realistic estimates->narrow GOP win |
Vote-Share Equations: November 2010 Update Predictions: The current and past predictions of VP and VC using the economic forecasts from the US model are: The prediction of an Obama victory with 53.4 percent of the two-party vote is condi... | |
Aug 3, 2011 at 5:15 PM | |
To be sure, Drew Westen is wrong about many things: mischaracterizing FDR, falsely claiming that Bush's tax cuts went "largely to the wealthiest Americans" (actually about 20% goes to those in the top two brackets), claiming that better messaging would solve Obama's problems while ignoring some of that messaging that exactly fit Westen's prescriptions. But he got some things right:
It has to be said, however, that Westen's vision of how Obama ought to conduct his presidency seems oddly familiar.On a different subject, perusal of the White House web site reveals a preoccupation with the underserved: underserved youth, underserved communities, underserved markets. (Careful editing is required here, lest "underserved" be mistyped as "undeserved," which is not at all the desired message.) If some communities are underserved, the implication is inescapable that other communities are overserved, or at the very least, served.
Many commentators expect Obama to run a negative campaign in 2012, blaming Republicans for the nation's troubles, but a positive theme is staring him right in the face: "Obama 2012--America, you've been served!"
Posted by: Rob | August 09, 2011 at 10:14 AM
James Taranto also has some useful comments about Weston's piece at the WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904007304576496210107745664.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion
Posted by: MartyB | August 09, 2011 at 02:21 PM
I continue to be surprised at some people's unawareness of the federal government's looming financial disaster. E.g. Yglesias has an analysis that's very sensible from a political POV, but he ends by implying that "some forceful central bank action" can prevent a double dip recession. What forceful action does he imagine would accomplish this? They've already driven interest rates down to nearly zero. The enormous ongoing deficit has caused a drop in the US debt rating with more drops threatened. Increased deficit spending would make this already intractable problem even more horrendous.
Nate Silver wrote:
the remaining proposals consist entirely of spending cuts while still reducing the debt significantly
In reality, the remaining proposals don't reduce the debt significantly; they let the debt keep increasing by over a trillion dollars a year.
I imagine Silver was merely writing carelessly. He no doubt meant that these proposals make the debt lower than it would be without these proposals. Still, he's missing the big point. The agreement to raise the debt ceiling was nowhere near adequate to satisfy the financial markets. Its inadequacy is what led S&P to reduce the federal government's credit rating. And, further drops are in the card without some unimaginable combination spending cuts and tax increases.
IMHO twelve months from now when the deficits are still running well over a trillion dollars a year, when inflation is rising, and when the stock market is still in the tank, nobody will remember who "won" the current debt limit battles. These battles will be seen as a fight over trivia.
Posted by: David in Cal | August 10, 2011 at 03:10 AM
For pure entertainment, it's hard to beat the Administration's push-back against the S&P downgrade. It seems the problem isn't the massive deficits, it's that S&P had the nerve to call attention to them. Suddenly we have some insight into how Obamacare intends to bend down the cost curve: if the x-rays are bad, retouch them!
Posted by: Rob | August 10, 2011 at 03:54 AM
Twitter's word limit results in some confusing posts. Brendan quotes Justin Wolfers brief comment:
"In my whole life I don't think I've ever seen the DC conventional wisdom as firmly at odds with standard textbook economics"
What alleged conventional wisdom is Wolfers talking about? What standard textbook economic principle is he alluding to? Does it relate to tax cuts? Stimulus spending? The risk of continuing multi-trillion dollar deficits? My impression is that these things are controversial among both DC insiders and economists, That is, I don't think there is a single CW nor a single standard textbook position on these questions.
Posted by: David in Cal | August 14, 2011 at 11:36 AM