TorilMUD Forums

So, here's a question. With Republicans firmly back in the House, will Obama sabotage the economy and fault the Republicans for a more democrat political outcome in 2012? Would a poor economy in 2011 politically favor the Republican party or the Democrat party? Finally, which party would benefit most from a strong economic recovery?

no, no, yes

There is no such thing as a strong recovery for the US, it is just not possible.

It's not likely, but a strong recovery in the United States is entirely possible, given expansion possibilities in the American market. Perhaps a turn toward more durable consumer goods or a mass internal migration could prompt many opportunities for the domestic market.

Americans are not in prime positioning to take advantage of worldwide consumer taste changes, but it depends on what it is exactly that they are going to turn to. But it's not to say that it is impossible. Rare earth metals exports from the US may make a comeback, depending on how things go with the Chinese...

The economy is fucked and the only thing that can fix it is time. The more interventions into the economy, the longer it will take. Things will not be substantially better by the next presidential election.

Interesting question on whether a poor economy will favor Republicans or Dems. Probably Republicans. As far as the public is concerned the economy is a reflection on Obama. This is actually quite unfair, but it is what it is.

If the Republicans can put an even half decent candidate on the ticket in 2012 they will have the President and both houses of Congress.

I somewhat agree with Corth's analysis, but the professor should not be underestimated. Nor should the African American and Hispanic vote. If I was Obama, I would in early 2012 or late 2011, issue some major executive orders like a DADT repeal and EPA regulations etc and get everyone fired up. Change the focus of the election from the economy to social issues and use that to turn out the youth vote.

The president has immense policy power, most presidents just don't wield much of it out of deference to the legislature. Obama has already said he'd be fine being a 1 term president... with his belief that he was elected to right wrongs on a fundamental idealistic level, rather than govern the nation... we're probably in for a hell of a ride.

The economy can not improve until business finds a stable and hospitable environment so I think Corth's criticism lacks a certain subltety. Obama may not have been the direct cause of it (I'll give a lot of blame to Bush on that), but he may or may not deserve plenty of blame for how he handled the aftermath, but he certainly deserves ALL of the blame for creating an uncertain, hostile business environment going forward. Republicans in Congress goes a long ways in those terms, and Obama is pivoting on business, how and whether he can reconcile his agenda and reign in his czars all of whom are unfriendly towards business will be key to whether business believes the US can grow again.

The Fed's decision for Quantative Easing 2 and I've even heard of 3... is likely to help the economy by wiping out money (most specifically debt, even more specifically housing debt). I haven't decided whether this is solely about the economy or also a threat / promise against China's refusals on currency manipulation, but I'm rosier on the economy than Corth is despite being vehemently against the cures.