Trying 2 discern larger patterns of US presidential politics, it looks to me as if voters have spent the last 40 yrs getting whipsawed from pillar to post.
Starting with Carter, an ineffectual liberal who discovered that good intentions don't mean a thing if you don't have the swag to intimidate Congress, voters turned in frustration to the hard right-winger Reagan, and loved him until he proved 2 B a habitual liar and tax cheat. Michael Dukakis was such a mediocre candidate he couldn't even best the elder Bush, but Clinton had no trouble doing so.
Of all the occupants of the White House in the past 40 yrs, Clinton was closest to being a magician, and pulled at least a couple of rabbits out of hats. His welfare reform, for example, though it hurt a lot of people as well as helping some, brilliantly stole a march on his opposition. But in the end he played ball with the oligarchs, gutting bank regulation by allowing Larry Summers to sabotage the Glass-Steagall Act. Next was the stupidest president (so far) Dubya, followed by the most ineffectual liberal ever, Obama.
To some degree it's not Obama's fault. He naively underestimated the ferocity of his racist opposition, and due to his habitual narcissism induced by doting grandparents, failed to learn the lessons Carter left 4 him 35 yrs earlier concerning the intractability of a hostile Congress. We endured 8 yrs of Obama & all we have to show for it is the crappy Affordable Care Act. It sets a good precedent, but then so did Jimmy Carter's Environment speech of so long ago.
As we look @ the current field of candidates, voters have little 2 B cheerful about. Between a boatload of ludicrous Rehooligans who appear 2 B attempting 2 outdo each other in stupid macho posturing and Hillary Clinton, whose skin-deep liberalism covers everything & touches nothing, the shallowness of our political system stands exposed.
It's past time for an end to ping-pong politics. let's see -- there must B SOMEone out there who's different...
No comments:
Post a Comment