LIVING POLITICS
Howard Fineman
Homeward Bound
Which candidate has the right cards to ease Las Vegas's economic jitters?
Like conventioneers, presidential candidates blew through Las Vegas in search of the big score—not at the gaming tables, but in Nevada's presidential caucuses. As the candidates worked the crowds, they heard vivid stories of the human cost of the country's reckless bet on real estate. One of America's fastest-growing metro areas, Las Vegas is now also the leader in mortgage foreclosures. A city built on faith in luck suddenly feels a little scared, as the dream of cheap loans for homes vanishes for the hotel employees who make up the aspiring middle class. "The economy overshadows everything," says D. Taylor, who runs the city's 60,000-member Culinary Workers Union. "It's the issue."
Who has the right cards to deal with it? Among Republicans, Mitt Romney proves his business savvy every time he dips into the pile of cash he made in the corporate world. He had a golden touch (but less so as governor of Massachusetts, where growth numbers were not impressive). As governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee produced good figures in a poor, rural state, but his advocacy of a national sales tax is problematic—probably the wrong idea at a time when consumer confidence is so low. John McCain can argue that he opposed some of President Bush's tax cuts, but might not be eager to do so when many think that putting more money in the hands of consumers is the priority.
On the Democratic side, if life (and campaigns) were fair, the political beneficiary would be former senator John Edwards. From the beginning, he has had the tightest focus on those struggling to make ends meet and offered the earliest and most sweeping plan to meet the home-mortgage crisis: a seven-year moratorium on rate increases and a new, court-enforceable mandate that lenders make a "good-faith effort" to redo onerous loans. But being first in politics rarely pays off. Having failed to win in must-win Iowa, he's struggled for attention.
Another "It's the economy, stupid" election would seem to benefit Hillary Clinton more than Barack Obama. He certainly knows how the other half lives; he was a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago. He has unveiled an economic-rescue plan that focuses on pumping cash into the economy through a tax rebate and a government fund to help mortgage borrowers. But his claim to the presidency isn't based on economic know-how; it's based on his prescience in opposing the war in Iraq and a bring-us-together tone of reconciliation. Iraq is less visible now, and Democratic voters may be eager to hear more accusatory rhetoric about banks, hedge funds and Republican regulators.
Hillary has copied much of the Edwards plan, shortening the rate freeze from seven years to five. More important, she can claim to have absorbed a feel for how to deal with tough economic times by watching how her husband worked out of a recession and into the Long Boom of the '90s. But she's leery of relying on nostalgia, realizing that elections are always about the future. "You're not going to see TV ads about the 1990s," says one of her top aides, who didn't want to be named discussing strategy. To do so would require bringing Bill back to center stage. That's a gamble that Hillary isn't willing to take.
© 2008
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/27/2008 11:14:10 PM
Comment: Barak Obama is both white and black. That is his X factor. Unfortunately, it looks as though Latino's will vote for Hillary three to one.
The only way OBAMA can gain ground in the Latino community is through advertising. He needs to participate in a commercial which emphasizes UNITY. This commercial will emphasize his MOM in the beginning. Then it will show five couples, one Asian, Indian, Black, Latino and White. These couples should be crowded around OBAMA thanking him for bringing them together and expressing their trust in his health care, education and justice system reform plans. These issue bring the LATINO and AFRICAN AMERICANS TOGETHER. AT the end a simple statement, TOGETHER WE CAN CONQUER ANY OBSTACLE AND ACHIVE ANY SOLUTION (eddiewhere2008) . This commercial should be blitzed across T.V. screens in America for the next couple of weeks. IN EVERY STATE OBAMA campaigns in, he should organize marches of unity which inlude all RACES and AGES. THE THEME should be UNITY -a solid solution to the DIVISIVE ISSUES WHICH CAUSE RACIAL TENSION. A COMMERCIAL should be made of these MARCHES. IT'S MAIN MESSAGE WILL BE THAT OBAMA CAN BRING ALL RACES ALL AGES TOGETHER to fix racial divisions. He has to show America how he can UNITE the NATION. I think every parent enjoys watching their child work with others to find solution to problems.
IF enough Latino's see this commercial and understand the message of unity they might give OBAMA a chance. Do not forget pictures are worth a thousand words and in this case, these commercials will be worth thousands of votes. Latino's feel they can economically improve their future with HILLARY's plan.
IT will be extremely diffiult for Obama to garner this vote unless he can show his economic plan will benefit the Latino community more than Hillary's. HILLARY IS being specific about the ramifications of her agenda on the Latino community. OBAMA has not been specific enough. The Latino's have no idea what OBAMA's economic plan is and how it affects them.
Posted By: klebrun @ 01/25/2008 2:09:08 PM
Comment: The death toll for the Iraq war, which we did not need to fight, is grossly understated. Besides massive Iraqi deaths, it does not take into account the additional deaths of Americans who are being denied health care coverage because of the cost of the war in Iraq - expected to cost well over a trillion dollars before we are finished.
For example, with an estimated 45 million uninsured Americans and an estimated one trillion dollars, the money spent on the Iraq war would average $22,222 per person, enough to pay almost ten years of health coverage for every uninsured person.
The average mortality rate in the U.S. by 2007 estimates is 8.26 per 1,000 population, or 371,700 deaths per year for a population of 45 million. The Kaiser Commission report, published in 2006, estimates the death rate for uninsured could be reduced by 10-15%. (1)
???Research has consistently shown that the lack of insurance ultimately compromises persons??? health because they are less likely to receive preventive care, are more likely to be hospitalized for avoidable health problems, and are more likely to be diagnosed in the late stages of disease. Having insurance
improves health overall and could reduce mortality rates for the uninsured by 10 to 15%.???
That amounts to a reduction in premature deaths ranging from approximately 37,000 to 55,000 per year for the uninsured population. So, each year we are condemning to death, for lack of insurance, a population that approaches the deaths caused by the nuclear attacks on Nagasaki and Hiroshima that ended the war with Japan.
(1) http://www.illinoiscovered.com/assets/cover_7451.pdf
Posted By: Potion78 @ 01/25/2008 11:48:02 AM
Comment: I'm voting for Obama! Bill Clinton served his 8 yrs we don't need 4 more yrs of him. I truly hope Jeb Bush isn't getting any ideas either ... It's time to end the Bush - Clinton dynasties.