below questions conventional wisdom with conventional analysis.
This article is from the New York Times
Click here: Economic View - Is History Siding With Obama's Economic
Plan? - NYTimes.com
If you want a state by state breakdown, try this website:
http://blueworksbetter.com/PresidentsGDPGrowth
Other webpages at the same site show that blue states have lower poverty
levels, lower infant mortality, better health insurance coverage, etc.
Now, all of this isn't a function of simply Blue=2 0vs. Red (or liberal
vs conservative). Rather, there is obviously an intervening variable.
What is it? I don't know, but my hunch is that it has to do with
attitudes toward the commons such that those states that have laws and
regs to protect the commons end up with better quality of life
indicators which then means that more people can purchase more goods
which then leads to greater (and more shared) economic prosperity. I
don't know of any research about this, though, so I emphasize that this
is my hunch.
The question is, how have Republicans managed to convince the American
public that as a political party, they manage the economy better? A
whole host of articles are coming out on "framing" of political
rhetoric. Hands down, the communication specialists who follow this say
that the Republicans are far better than the Democrats in communicating
clearly and in a manner that gets to people's fears and identities.
Democrats are trying to catch up, but aren't there yet. For example,
all Republicans have to do is to say that Democrats want to raise their
taxes and the American public takes the statement at face value. What
is omitted is all the other stuff that Republicans have done to actually
cost the taxpayer more than the taxes they cut. Want an example?
Here's an editorial in the New York Times about the "corporate free
ride":
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/opinion/18mon2.html?ref=opinion
Comments