A Tom Edsall column on Politico caught my eye this morning (hat tip Mike Allen's Playbook). It questions whether Barack Obama's campaign will be hurt more if he starts changing his upbeat tone to "prepare the electorate for tough times" or fails "to prepare voters for what's coming."
Do these guys really think voters don't know what's coming? And for those who haven't known for oh, say the last year that the economy is sinking faster than a Tim Wakefield knuckle ball, the last 7 to 10 days have made it pretty damn clear. Whether it's via the Internet, the TV news, the newspapers or the big lightboards in Times Square, we been inundated with the image of the U.S. and global economies as gigantic flushing toilets giving all of us one helluva big financial swirly.
We drive less because we have to choose whether to put gas in the car or food on the table. The one thing we do buy is a couple of extra sweaters or sweatshirts because we sure aren't going to put the heat up this winter. Just about everybody is worried about losing his or her job, knowing that golden parachutes are only for those who created this mess in the first place.
Do the pundits and the experts and the candidates themselves really think the people voting for them aren't aware of how bad it's going to get?
Maybe it's because I live in a Blue State and we're better informed. Maybe it's because I live in Taxachusetts, so talk of tax cuts just elicit a knowing nod, the kind you give to the elderly aunt in the nursing home you won't be able to afford next who tells you she once slept with Elvis or the 2-year-old who says she just caught a leprechaun in the back yard. That's a nice story, hon.
The truth is, we're not voting to change the tide, we're voting to stem it. We're voting for the lesser of two evils, for who won't make it worse. Neither man is going to make it better, at least not in the next four years.
And most of us already know that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment