For quite some time now, the
media's desire to see the American economy return to its '90s-era peak -
or at least improve enough to be safely ignored in favor of a new
overarching narrative - has been nearly palpable. Which is why it's not
shocking to see how a spate of good news about the economy has changed
the conventional wisdom about the President Obama's record, with
"objective" reporters describing him as on the rebound, and with his
most ardent defenders busting out superlatives like it's 2008. Andrew
Sullivan is once again calling him the center-left version of Ronald
Reagan. And Jonathan Chait believes history will ultimately recognize
his performance as not just good but capital-G great. That's that, I
guess; do we really need to bother with the rest of his second term?Even
though I snark, and even though the persistence of stagnant wages means
we're still experiencing a McJobs recovery, it's certainly true that
the president's followed his second midterm shellacking with a
surprisingly good few weeks. His poll numbers are looking better than
they have in almost two years, and Princeton election analyst Sam Wang
says it's "a real phenomenon," not a fluke. But while Sullivan, and
especially Chait, write as if Obama's comeback were basically
inevitable, I think there's a case to be made that the president's
rising popularity - while certainly due in part to his decision to enact
less crippling austerity than the Eurozone has and repugicans wanted -
has more to do with recent actions of his that were a break from the
approach that defined most of his second (and nearly all of his first)
term.
Before I describe that change, though, I want to make a
few things clear up front, so nobody gets the wrong idea. As Chait
partially acknowledges, and as any political scientist will tell you,
Americans give their presidents entirely too much blame and credit for
the state of the economy (usually their No. 1 metric), which is often
considerably outside any politician's immediate control. What's more,
there's reason to believe that at least some part of Obama's recent good
fortune owes to the plummeting price of oil, which despite what
politicians of both parties tell you when they're campaigning, has
essentially nothing to do with whatever's happening in the Oval Office.
Last but not least, the president's approval rating is not the product
of an exact science; it's more like a blurry snapshot of a moment in
time. So we shouldn't conclude too much from the recent polling, one way
or another..
No comments:
Post a Comment