Why Obama doesn't get enough credit
Why hasn鈥檛 the president gotten more credit for what history may ultimately judge as a record of remarkable accomplishments?
Why hasn鈥檛 the president gotten more credit for what history may ultimately judge as a record of remarkable accomplishments?
I鈥檝e always said that if someone calculated a ratio of credit-for-things-accomplished/things-accomplished聽President Obama would score extremely low.聽 Andrew Sullivan collects the facts.
One question I was left with after reading this was why does the President score so low on that ratio?聽 Why hasn鈥檛 he gotten more credit for what I believe history will ultimately judge as a record of remarkable accomplishments?
A few thoughts:
鈥揟he main reason is that people don鈥檛 do 鈥渃ounterfactuals鈥�鈥攖hings are getting better but still pretty bad for a lot of folks and pointing out that 鈥渋t coulda been worse,鈥� while true, is not鈥m鈥ood politics.聽 It didn鈥檛 help that the admin鈥攁nd I played a role in this one鈥攗nderestimated how high unemployment would go.
鈥揙n the other hand, where we were and where we are is (good politics, that is)鈥nd good economics too (if we don鈥檛 accurately evaluate the impact of policies like the Recovery Act, we won鈥檛 be guided by lessons learned next time).
鈥揂 useful concept in this regard is what economists call the 鈥渟wing鈥�鈥�(see 聽table; and you thought we economists weren鈥檛 swingers!).聽 It鈥檚 the difference between changes in a variable over two different periods.聽 So if GDP was falling 9% last year and growing 4% this year, the swing鈥攖he change from how you were falling to how fast you鈥檙e now growing is 4%-(-9%), or 13%.聽 The swings in GDP and jobs over the President鈥檚 first year in office are historically large.
鈥揚eople don鈥檛 like bailouts.聽 Saving the banks and autos was necessary but unpopular.聽 I get why helping the banks was unpopular; I don鈥檛 really get why the autos weren鈥檛.聽 People particularly dislike bailouts when too little is asked of the recipients (again, this should have favored the autos, where creditors took haircuts, unions made concessions, execs were replaced鈥 think that story was just not well explained).
鈥�Housing: missing from Sullivan鈥檚 review, these programs underperformed, and millions were hit by the bursting of the bubble.
鈥�Stuff Kicks in Later : Health care reform, financial regulation, consumer protection鈥攎ost people haven鈥檛 yet benefitted from these changes.
鈥揂 level of opposition heretofore unseen: when a national leader (senate minority leader Mitch McConnell) says out loud that his party鈥檚 #1 goal is not jobs, deficit reduction, improving education, the business climate, etc鈥ut is instead defeating the President, you鈥檙e into some unchartered territory.聽 These are the same folks that flirted with default on US debt.聽 When one side is willing to self-inflict wounds of that magnitude on the body politic, it鈥檚 awfully hard for anyone to look good.
鈥�Budget deficits: Polls show most people actually hold a reasonable view of federal budget deficits in that they don鈥檛 see them as our biggest problem right now (that would be 鈥渏obs鈥�).聽 But the echo chamber resounds with noise about all of our borrowing鈥揈urope鈥檚 debt problems amplify the noise鈥揳nd the admin has had trouble talking about the short-term imperative of more stimulus to attack unemployment at the same time as persuing聽the longer term imperative of getting on a sustainable budget path.
I鈥檓 sure there鈥檚 more, but those are some of the big ticket entries.聽 Still, I could be wrong, but unless the economy heads south again, the truth of Sullivan鈥檚 survey will dominate in coming months.聽 I may be way too optimistic about this, but you can鈥檛 fool all the people all the time.