Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Worsening Economy Gives Obama and Hillary a Chance to Copy Edwards' Populist Ideas

By William Greider, TheNation.com. Posted January 14, 2008.


There's an opportunity to sharpen the economic debate and ward off media labeling in the presidential race -- but it needs to be done fast.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also in Top Stories

Sleeping Around Craigslist
Anna Reed, Lily Penza, East Bay Express

Bush's Secret Army of Snoops and Snitches
Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive

Michael Pollan on What's Wrong with Environmentalism
Kate Cheney Davidson, Yale Environment 360

A Peak Oil Prophet Imagines Life in America After Wal-Mart
Michelle Nijhuis, Grist.org

Sci-Fi Heroes Take on the System
Roya Rastegar, ColorLines

Billionaires Are Gouging Your Grandparents
Brave New Films, Brave New Films

Online Activists Keep the Pressure on Obama
Ari Melber, TheNation.com

More stories by William Greider

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

When Goldman Sachs announces recession and the Federal Reserve chairman on the same day promises ready-to-go interest rate cuts, you can take it to the bank: the recession is official. The 2008 campaign's refreshing spirit -- the chorus of "change, change, change" -- is joined by a more traditional theme. "Jobs, jobs, jobs." Suddenly, everyone wants to sound like a Keynesian liberal, ready to prime the pump with federal spending.

My advice to Barack Obama: look through the John Edwards file -- he got there first -- and borrow freely from his sound ideas for economic stimulus. Then double or triple Edwards' numbers to show your sincerity. Do this fast. Hillary Clinton is already out of the box with a plan the New York Times describes as the first from any Democratic candidates.

Wrong. John Edwards was out front with aggressive anti-recession proposals in early December. Act now, he said, don't wait for the official announcement. First, Congress should put up at least $25 billion to stimulate job creation and be ready to spend another $75 billion as things get worse. Spend the money on "clean energy" infrastructure, the housing crisis, reform of unemployment insurance, aid programs to help families get through hard times and other wounds. Get the money out to the folks who will spend it right now and to public works projects that can create new jobs quickly.

Nothing fancy in the Edwards package, just the old-fashioned, meat-and-potato politics that used to make Democrats the party of working people. In the scale of what's happening to the economy, I think his proposals are too modest. Bill Gross, the insightful managing director of PIMCO, the major bond-investment house, has called for virtually doubling the federal deficit in order pump hundreds of billions into new economic activity. When bond holders are more alarmed about the economy than political leaders, you know something is backwards in American politics.

Edwards, alas, probably restrained the size of his stimulus package to convince the media gatekeepers he is not wacko and thus win some coverage for his forward thinking. No such luck. Edwards has his own shortcomings, but he has been victimized by the shallow political culture that empties meaning from presidential campaigns. The press early on consigned him to the "populist" stereotype and largely ignored the serious content of his agenda.

This is the curse that leads to enervating, brain-dead presidential cycles. Substance bores political reporters. Most of them do not understand economics or even know much about how government actually works. Given their ignorance, they prefer to play the role of theater critics and imagine that readers are desperate to hear their highly subjective and utterly unreliable reviews of the sideshow.

Actually, it's worse than that, as we witnessed again in New Hampshire and Iowa. Reporters read the polls -- slavishly rely on them -- then go out and gather connect-the-dots tidbits that appear to confirm the poll results. When polls are wrong, reporters are wrong. And shameless in their denials of culpability.

If reporters were to give up the arrogant role of reviewers, they would have to do real work -- the unfashionable task of reporting on what candidates actually say. Then the diligent would subject the substance, not style, to critical analysis and reactions from many quarters. This drudgery would seem humbling to the "boys on the bus." Most of them, anyway, are incompetent to do such work.

Barack Obama has a soaring message and charismatic authenticity, but he is vulnerable to mindless media judgments for almost an opposite reason. Despite his compelling rhetoric and character, Obama has left too much unsaid (or maybe we just haven't heard what he did say). If Obama loses contests here or there, I expect another stereotype will be assigned by the reviewers to explain the results -- Senator Lite. A nice enough guy but weak on substance, not ready for prime time.

From what I know about the man, that is a cruel distortion of his depth and temperament, but he does need to fill in some blanks. The recession gives Obama a ripe opportunity to protect himself from media labeling, without changing character. First, produce the concrete policy proposals demanded by competitive campaign rituals. Then speak more loftily and ambitiously about the American economy and what Obama envisions for the more distant future. What might it look like then years hence? How does he hope to get there? These are reasonable questions he has not yet addressed, but can answer in broad strokes. Or maybe he already has addressed them and the media thought it sounded boring.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: election 2008, recession

William Greider is the author of, most recently, "The Soul of Capitalism" (Simon & Schuster).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
In November
Posted by: Skills83 on Jan 14, 2008 12:14 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope to see an Obama/Edwards ticket. They seem like natural allies

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You've got to be kidding! Posted by: JohnMucci
» RE: You've got to be kidding! Posted by: Neighbor
» Support John Edwards on Friday, Jan 18th! Posted by: workingfamiliesfirst
End the war in Iraq and we have another 300-500B...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jan 14, 2008 12:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..per year to use. Potentially, we could even stop selling our infrastructure costs to China.

Imagine that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Deeds- Not Words
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jan 14, 2008 1:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't want a DINO mouthing Democratic ideas just long enough to get elected. What I want is a REAL Democrat on the ballot come November.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Deeds- Not Words Posted by: FeralCat
More Empty "Analysis" on Neo-Cons 'R Us
Posted by: LookOut on Jan 14, 2008 2:45 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Barack Obama has a soaring message and charismatic authenticity... The recession gives Obama a ripe opportunity to protect himself from media labeling, without changing character."

Translation: Obama has no character. Outside of skin color, Obama is a standard snake-oil stump actor that will blurt out virtually anything but valid specifics to be "electable". Greider’s is another hollow story from the author of a threadbare whitewash on the "Federal Reserve" Corp (Secrets of the Temple) that is an illegal private bank monopoly run by and for Fascist organized corporate crime.

Obama, Edwards and Hillary are all war mongering DINO flavored "neo-cons" as amply demonstrated by their voting records, corporate monopolist funders and their selected handlers:


John Edwards: Barry Blechman, Jimmy Carter assistant director of US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, founder and chairman of the Henry L. Stimson Center; Irving Blickstein, former assistant deputy chief of Naval operations, RAND Corporation (reportedly a CIA front)

Barack Obama: Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security advisor and handler of Pres. Carter; Anthony Lake, Clinton administration national security adviser and president's handler; Sarah Sewall, Clinton administration deputy secretary of defense, counter-insurgency czar; Richard Clarke, Clinton and Bush administration counter-terrorism expert; Susan Rice, Clinton administration Africa specialist and NSC member of globalist Brookings Institution; Bruce Riedel, former CIA officer, NSC Near East and Asian affairs at Brookings.

Hillary Clinton: Bill Clinton; Madeline Albright, Clinton administration secretary of state responsible for the globalist intervention in the Balkans; Sandy Berger, Clinton's National Security adviser and handler; Richard Holbrooke, UN ambassador; Gen. Wesley Clark, handled the attack on Serbia/Kosovo; Leslie Gelb, arch globalist on the Council on Foreign Relations, former State and Defense Department official; Martin Indyk, Clinton administration Israel ambassador, Brookings Inst.; Strobe Talbott, second Clinton handler, and Deputy Sec. of State, creator of Caspian oil group, Brookings Inst.; Jeffrey Smith, former CIA general counsel.

The "authenticity" here is Fascist and goes to an act bought and paid for. This election process is a farce DC runway show where handpicked “neo-con” actors make the usual empty promises and cotton candy MSM approved speeches for their corporate monopoly paymasters..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not Neo-Cons, but Neo-Liberals Posted by: pdxstudent
gender and names
Posted by: armorica on Jan 14, 2008 3:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is the press referring to the man by his last name and the woman by her first name?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: gender and names Posted by: gemajabe
» RE: gender and names Posted by: Lauren
» RE: gender and names Posted by: Amolibri
» RE: gender and names Posted by: defrag
» RE: gender and names Posted by: When In Doubt
» RE: gender and names Posted by: kirktc
» RE: gender and names Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: gender and names Posted by: Doubtom
» They chose their own brands Posted by: sliver
Another election Farce on the way.
Posted by: douglashoyt on Jan 14, 2008 6:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I knew the Bush/Kerry ticket was a sham. Those two candidates had so much in common; one had to understand that the election was a sham. Kerry was the Bush team shill.

Now, we are being treated to another farce.

In todays racist and sexist America, Clinton and Obama don't have a chance. Women get paid a fraction of what a man is paid for the same work in corporate America; blacks are pretty much excluded from the main stream economy and occupy prison more often than in corporate offices.

Only the idealistic and naive believe that a woman or a black could be elected President.

Why do you think the Republican/Neocon press is so "in love" with those two candidates? Both are pro war and pro business.

We are being conned again by the ruling elite.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's The Iraq War Stupid
Posted by: left_libertarian on Jan 14, 2008 6:27 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America has to fix what is wrong in Iraq before she can start to fix anything else.

A majority if the Iraqi and American people want US forces out of Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's NOT out here where I live Posted by: zooeyhall
Only with permission!
Posted by: mark_proulx on Jan 14, 2008 7:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clinton and Obama will adopt Edwards' populist message only under three conditions:

1. Their pollsters give them permission.

2. Their foucs groups give them permission.

3. Their corporate sponsors give them permission.

Even if they start talking the talk, I guarantee you that neither of them will mean a word of what they say. Both are masters of the art of saying nothing in the guise of saying something. Think of their rhetoric as verbal souffles: lots of nice fluffy air, not much content.

Clinton and Obama have one and only one redeeming attribute: they're not
Republicans. I used to be hopeful that we could do so much better. No longer. Look for more diversion of power and wealth to the corporate and financial elites in the years to come.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» They Aren't Republicans Posted by: pdxstudent
You are one of my heroes, but you're wrong on Obama
Posted by: FeralCat on Jan 14, 2008 7:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama would not agree with your approach in your book "The Soul of Capitalism". Obama is very comfortable with ReaganRubinomics. He admires Reagan. He likes order. He does not like the messiness of democracy. Read his book. Plus he is a total "free trader' of the Friedman school. He voted for the terrible Peru FTA that will keep children in the copper mines and force farmers into them and into the canning plants that Wal-Mart wants to build. His benefactor Citigroup is salivating over Peru's private social security program.
Sure, he'll steal Edwards populist message when he talks to the unions, but he will never, never follow through. He's a bigger corporatist than Clinton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary and drugs?
Posted by: Puffin on Jan 14, 2008 8:25 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Speaking of Hillary...have any of the intrepid journalists on the American scene ever asked her if she did drugs? And did she inhale?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hillary and drugs? Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: Hillary and drugs? Posted by: VZEQICVA
» She was a 60's student Posted by: gellero
It's the corporate media that controls the message.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 14, 2008 9:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"This is the curse that leads to enervating, brain-dead presidential cycles. Substance bores political reporters. Most of them do not understand economics or even know much about how government actually works. Given their ignorance, they prefer to play the role of theater critics and imagine that readers are desperate to hear their highly subjective and utterly unreliable reviews of the sideshow."

That's a deliberate strategy. The press never mentions the fact that the main reason Bush went into Iraq was to steal the oil for the benefit of Exxon and Chevron, because you'll piss off the shareholders, who will eventually replace the Board of Directors, who will then fire the problematic editors and journalists.

It's not "a failure", it's not anything but fear of being fired. Journalists and editors who want to keep their jobs quickly learn what kind of coverage and attitude gets rewarded by corporate media executives - and there are always a few willing to sing the right song.

"Actually, it's worse than that, as we witnessed again in New Hampshire and Iowa. Reporters read the polls -- slavishly rely on them -- then go out and gather connect-the-dots tidbits that appear to confirm the poll results. When polls are wrong, reporters are wrong. And shameless in their denials of culpability"

First of all, we still don't know exactly what happened in New Hampshire, with Diebold and LHS Associates controlling the voting system. The exit polls and the pre-voting polls all came up with Obama winning, often by large margins - and then come election day, the winner is Clinton? Note that the polls were accurate when it came to all the candidates except Clinton and Obama.

See NH exit polls say Obama wins, but not by a landslide, Jan 8.

The main problem here is the press coverage of the election - coverage that ignores the real issues and tries to spin it as an emotional contest based on race and gender - a fancy puppet show, in other words.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stimulate me
Posted by: solrev on Jan 14, 2008 10:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why isn’t one of the candidates using the single payer healthcare proposal as a stimulus package? Increase the medicare tax on business and individuals to 3% (from 1.45%) and eliminate the middleman. No additional costs for employers for healthcare, no additional costs for individuals for healthcare, and no costs for states for healthcare. Add another 6% from general income tax fund, which is easily found if there is a change in foreign policy, and you are home free. Only a fool does the same thing over and over and expects to get their country back. I guess we will follow the cato proposal and make sick people choose not to be treated.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The point of this article?
Posted by: 2dogarage on Jan 14, 2008 10:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why does the author begin by pointing out that Edwards was the first of the candidates to address these issues and then end with a discourse on how Obama can rip off that message and use it to his advantage this late in the game?

What do you say we just nominate the guy who has been campaigning on this dry, boring economic platform from the get-go, don't you think? It was so uninteresting before people finally got the message as to make Edwards look boring and uninteresting. Now that it is a big issue you somehow advocate other candidates jumping on this highly relevant band-wagon?

Thanks but I don't need some ambitious, inexperienced corporate pawn cramming to find the 'right note of relevancy' while looking over the shoulder of someone who has been doing his homework all along.

Barack Obama would do well to take a chill pill, ask Edwards if he'd like to have his support, and then sail handily into 16 years of employment in the service of we the people. He'll make a damned fine president when he can finally disentangle himself from his handlers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And he looks like one too
Posted by: 2dogarage on Jan 14, 2008 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A note to the Superbowl crowd: --I know there are some progressive superbowl fans out there-- (although I am not one of them,I did however think the Prince halftime show last year was brilliant and the huddle view ain't bad...)

But for those of you enamored with the dynamic visceral theater of the superbowl phenomena, hear my plea!

Go to JohnEdwards.com and see the cutest high school football hero your girlfriend or you wanted to go to the prom with! (I'm trying for gender neutrality did it work?)

People talk about playing the Gender card or the Race card. I say we play the Cute card!!!
Clearly John Edwards is the cutest candidate for the Democratic nomination, although Obama runs a close second and Hillary was quite a looker in her day, quite beautiful actually.

OK OK, I know that's not a good criteria for voting but just think of how much easier it will be to watch those state-of-union addresses?!

--shameless Edwards supporter--
(Remember we have to reach from 3rd place while the others pick up his technique.)

How about the name card? Even white supremacists can get behind a white guy with two first names!

Going!... :-)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
Peg the sub-prime mortgages at 2% above prime..!
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Jan 14, 2008 12:43 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Obama or Hillary cared about those facing foreclosure and th trauma of eviction they would endorse my solution which is to Peg these Mortgages at 2% above Prime and forgive all penalties to date 1/2 of which are illegal anyway..

This would save the American Tax Payer from paying to bail out these lending institutions banks of other for what will be billions and billions and still see millions of our fellow American lose their homes and then create a new crisis in housing on a lower scale in the already inflated rental market, those who can afford this result even less than those currently but barely home owners..in sub prime mortgages..

If we peg these mortgages at 2% above prime many not all but very many of these current home owners would get relief as those super low interest rates they did have have now ballooned to the ridiculous heights of 9-11 even 14% which is why so many of them will be foreclosed and thus evicted..

Peg these Mortgages at 2% above Prime..it can be done and will save our nation form yet more government welfare for the multi-billion dollar corporations..at the expense of the average struggling American..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
» RE: I HEAR ON THE NEWS Posted by: joysea
» Muslim Caliphate?? Posted by: gellero
Poor Edwards...
Posted by: irenicus on Jan 14, 2008 4:01 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It says a lot about the incompetence of the Bush Administration when it is now pretty much impossible for a white man to be elected president.

wankersphere.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Support John Edwards on Fri, Jan 18th
Posted by: workingfamiliesfirst on Jan 14, 2008 5:33 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Edwards is the only candidate who has the courage, strength, and conviction to articulate what so many don't want to hear. And what a fantastic vision he has for what America could be! We need John Edwards more than ever. If you agree, give Edwards what you can on Jan 18th, at www.johnedwards.com. A number of activists have launched an online fundraising drive with a goal of raising 7 million dollars for Edwards on Friday, Jan 18th. Please join in this wonderful effort!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Stimulas Package is Great....but are the Younger Workers Willing to Work
Posted by: marrieah on Jan 15, 2008 6:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems now most people only want a job that is paying what many people worked twenty years to accomplish.

Also,there are many who figure it is better for them to sit on their ass and wait for a check in the mail.

Although many programs have been helpful in the past to help people get on their feet, so many now a days are driven by what they see on TV and in the movie, think that certain things are beneath them.

Gone are those who wanted to work because of the pride and indepentance it afforded them, now people want to start off, with nothing to back them, at the top of the ladder and wonder why they can't.

And the money that are earned a spent of pricey toys. I don't know what will help people who don't want to help themselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]