Sky Dancing

a place to discuss real issues

  • Looking to the Future

    dakinikat

    With the ink barely dry on the analysis of the 2010 elections and some of the results still unknown, the pundit class is already out with their prognostications for 2012.  I’m not sure I want to see their future but it’s not always the wanting that makes one look.

    Here’s one from The Hill called ‘You think -’10 was tough?  Check out ’12.’  This little fact grabs one’s attention.

    For the first time in two cycles, Democrats will have more seats up for grabs than the Republicans, and the party could see its shrunken majority erased altogether.

    That’s just looking at the impact for the national level.  Here’s some numbers from the state level at National Journal.

    Republicans picked up 680 seats in state legislatures, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures — the most in the modern era. To put that number in perspective: In the 1994 GOP wave, Republicans picked up 472 seats. The previous record was in the post-Watergate election of 1974, when Democrats picked up 628 seats.

    The GOP gained majorities in at least 14 state house chambers. They now have unified control — meaning both chambers — of 26 state legislatures.

    That control is a particularly bad sign for Democrats as they go into the redistricting process. If the GOP is effective in gerrymandering districts in many of these states, it could eventually lead to the GOP actually expanding its majority in 2012.

    I know we’ve discussed this before, but the question has to be re-asked.  How did we get to the point where the GOP looks ascendant at a time when every one felt that Dubya/Cheney had destroyed the party for years to come?   The NYT has suggested that it was part of a GOP comeback plan but I don’t see it that way. They had help from the establishment Democrats with their arrogance and insistent that we all just vote for them and they’d do what’s best for us.

    The White House struggled to keep Democrats in line, with a misplaced confidence in the power of the coalition that propelled Mr. Obama into office. Republicans capitalized on backlash to the ambitious agenda Mr. Obama and his party pursued, which fueled unrestricted and often anonymous contributions to conservative groups, some advised by a nemesis Democrats thought they had shaken, Karl Rove. That money so strengthened the Republican assault across the country that an exasperated Democratic party strategist likened it to “nuclear Whac-a-Mole.”

    Most of all, Republican leaders had the foresight to imagine the possibility of winning again. Even now, they believe they could have taken back the Senate if they had just managed to block at least two Tea Party candidates who proved unelectable.

    I’m sorry.  I don’t think people like the GOP or their message and if you check they polls, they still blame the economy and a lot of the problems on Dubya and his GOP cronies.  This election was not FOR the Republicans.  It was against the Democratic Party and you-know-who.  We’ve had at least three “change and change now” mandates in a row.  No one appears to be really listening in the District.

    There were two observations I’d like to make.  One is that the worst of the Tea Party candidates lost in all but a few states. The second is that a lot of the Dems that lost were the from the Blue Dawg side of the party. I’m still trying to think about what those two trends say when taken together.  The other numbers trend was that the midwest went so red.   Given the looming redistricting and the importance of state machinations to presidential campaigns, 2012 could be the Superbowl of modern elections.

    Stay tuned and let us know what you think.



  • Thursday Reads

    dakinikat

    Good Morning!

    I’m so glad to be able to surf the web again with my morning coffee!!  It’s become such a ritual for me that living without it has been difficult.  It’s just not  easy doing it on that little tiny BlackBerry screen.

    So, I thought I’d start with some economic threads today.  Some economists are beginning to decipher the election and what it might mean for the economy.  The first link is from Mark Thoma who writes on what the election might mean for financial reform.  Will the Republicans try to repeal Dodd-Frank or block Basel 3?   Both are important to bringing translucency to the financial markets.  Basel 3 is specific to banking and is the international standard for capital and reporting requirements.  Thoma takes some of the major new Regs one by one.  That coverage alone is worth the read.

    At least for the next two years, we should not expect any big changes. If there are changes, they will likely be incremental and move toward less rather than more strict regulation. In the longer run, i.e. beyond the next two years, if there is divided government then gridlock is likely to persist and there will be no big changes. If Democrats retake control, the tilt will be toward stricter regulation and enforcement, but I wouldn’t anticipate any major new regulatory initiatives. However, if Republicans take broad based control, we should expect an attempt to undue many of the more restrictive provisions of recent bills, regulations, and agreements as the free market approach they favor would be likely to prevail.

    The Curious Capitalist at Time Magazine–Michael Schuman–thinks the election results will be bad for the world economy.  All of us economist types seem to be using the G word.  GRIDLOCK.  This is his gridlock point.  There are more, so be sure to check it out.

    First, we’ve got the gridlock problem. A divided Washington probably means that not much will get done to aid the stalling U.S. recovery. Forget about a second stimulus. We’re more likely to see extra pressure on Obama to cut spending. And that’s not good for growth. Longer-term issues, such as financial reform, could just drift.


    The FED continues with the next phase of Quantitative Easing. I’m not sure what all is included with its purchase requirements yet, but the basic idea is to get  paper investments off the books of banks and give them money instead.  They can’t just sit on cash because there’s no return.  If they want profits they’ll need to  invest or loan it to catch their arbitrage profits.  Will they loan it out this time or where will it go?  No one can ever tell for sure but the FED hopes it will be used for loans.  Especially, in an economy like this. Here’s a FAQ on the QE from Real Time Economics at the WSJ. I promise I’ll write more on this as soon as my laptop looks normal again.  That and I’m curious about the currency war possibilities. Look for it some time this week.  Meanwhile, back to the QE FAQ and the big question.

    Why is the Fed planning another round of QE?

    Even though the Fed has been holding short-term interest rates near zero since December 2008, the economy remains weak. The Fed is falling short on its two primary mandates: unemployment, at 9.6%, is well above “maximum sustainable employment” and inflation is running below what the Fed considers to be “price stability,” an informal target of 1.75% to 2%. Fed officials believe more bond-buying could push rates even lower, though they admit the effect may not be as pronounced as it was before. “The impact of securities purchases may depend to some extent on the state of financial markets and the economy,” Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said in late August. “For example, such purchases seem likely to have their largest effects during periods of economic and financial stress, when markets are less liquid and term premiums are unusually high.”

    [MABlue here] For those of you who are not very well versed in the world of finance, here’s is a good video from Market Place. The guy does a pretty good job in his grosso modo explanation of  Quantitative Easing.

    Oh, dear, look OVER there!!! It’s the Clinton Impeachment again!!! Oh, the there is The Hill and it’s supposed to be a good thing.

    On the day after Republicans reclaimed control of Congress, a Democratic lawmaker said he will introduce a measure that would “disavow” the impeachment of former President Clinton.

    Rep. Chaka Fattah (Pa.) said that the resolution is necessary so that Democrats and Republicans can work together in a bipartisan fashion.

    “As we enter a period in which bipartisanship will be a major priority for the Congress, it is vital that we disavow the most highly partisan example of the politics of personal destruction in the recent history of this House,” Fattah said in a statement.

    The last time they were in power, House Republicans impeached Clinton for allegedly perjuring himself over his supposed affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Clinton, only the second president in history to be impeached, was eventually acquitted at trial in the Senate.

    Does any one else find this a little weird? And, let’s add another one the the weird pile from Ben Smith over at Politico. This one is on “HillBill”.  Actually, it’s just  a picture of SOS Clinton in New Guinea with some glib comment about how she’s in the right place at the right time.  (sigh). Couldn’t he just say something nice about the trip?

    The Guardian has an interesting piece up on Election Day Turnout.  It is–as they say–a numbers game.

    Here, as far as I can see, are the three big top-line differences:
    1. The 2008 electorate was 74% white, plus 13% black and 9% Latino. The 2010 numbers were 78, 10 and 8. So it was a considerably whiter electorate.
    2. In 2008, 18-to-29-year-olds made up 18% and those 65-plus made up 16%. Young people actually outvoted old people. This year, the young cohort was down to 11%, and the seniors were up to a whopping 23% of the electorate. That’s a 24-point flip.
    3. The liberal-moderate-conservative numbers in 2008 were 22%, 44% and 34%. Those numbers for yesterday were 20%, 39% and 41%. A big conservative jump, but in all likelihood because liberals didn’t vote in big numbers.

    So, I’m still trying to rediscover all my old links and haunts.  I’m relying on you to help me for awhile. I crashed while I was spiffing up the place so I need to get on with that.  Any suggestions?

    What’s on your reading and blogging list today?

  • Back to Internetreality

    dakinikat

    I’ve been on the internet (well, a very primitive version of it where you dial directly to another computer) since around 1981. I’ve owned a PC since then too. I’ve lost two hard drives during the entire time and both have been in the last 2 years when believe me, the last thing I need to do is lose a hard drive. You cannot possibly imagine what it’s like to lose you entire research agenda, literature, data, papers, and programs in one fell swoop and not be able to come near them for about five days except what little remains on your flash drive. Fortunately, I have Mozy, but now I’m finding the challenges of restoring that along with all the software updates and every thing else. I’ve got to completely get my computer to feel like home again.  It feels like some stranger’s desk top.   I’ve been at it since about 1:00 this afternoon and I’m no where close to it. I pray this never happens to any of you. Recovering all of this stuff is just taking me hours and I’m a nervous wreck.

    So, any way, I’m trying to get back to surfing the web instead of switching between news channels to see what the deal is with the new reality. The most fun all day I’ve had was watching all the reporters running around the Congressional offices playing “Where’s Nancy”? ABC news evidently scored THE interview.

    “Being the first woman speaker and breaking the marble ceiling is pretty important,” she told ABC News. “Now it’s time to move on.”

    Pelosi said she had “no regrets” after losing her position as the most powerful woman in American politics and said the country’s unemployment problem was to blame for the Democrats’ loss.

    “We believe we did the right thing, and we worked very hard in our campaigns to convey that to the American people,” she said. “Nine and a half percent unemployment is a very eclipsing event. If people don’t have a job, they’re not too interested in how you intend for them to have a job. They want to see results.”

    Asked to assess her tenure, Pelosi quickly answered, “Job well done.”

    You can watch Diane Sawyer’s interview at the link.  I won’t post it here.  I’ve got Bodhisattva vows to consider.

    I admit to not watching the returns on MSNBC but The Daily Beast apparently was amused.  Did you see this?

    Matthews asked Bachmann if she was hypnotized. Olbermann feared the Tea Party would eat away at the Earth’s core. O’Donnell prepared for the Rand Paul end times. WATCH VIDEO of the liberal network’s most distraught moments on Election Night.

    MABlue pointed over to Krugman’s blog in the last thread. Woah!  The koolaid detox is official there!  He was watching Obama’s presser too.

    Urk. I just gave up on the presidential press conference. When Obama declared that Americans rejected Democrats in part because “We were in such a hurry to get things done that we didn’t change how things got done,” I checked out.

    Nobody cares about this stuff — they care about results. Nobody really cares about earmarks; they’re just code for spending less (less on somebody else, of course, not me). Nobody cares about civility and bipartisanship, which in practice are code for Democrats giving in to Republican demands. Nobody cares about parliamentary maneuvers: we can argue about the role of health reform in the election, but I bet not one voter in 50 knows or cares that it was passed using reconciliation (as were the sacred Bush tax cuts we must, must retain).

    Over at Think Progress, Yglesias thinks Obama Should Move to the White House.

    Rather than plunge into the debate over whether Obama should “move to the center” or adopt tactics of high-intensity conflict with congressional Republicans let me suggest another tack. A day contains 24 hours. That’s true for you, for me, for John Boehner, and for Barack Obama. But Obama has more job responsibilities than Boehner, and both of them have more responsibilities than I do. So it’s important for the President to think about how he wants to spend his time.

    Okay, who wants to be the first to take THAT one on?

    I really was going to save this one for the morning reads, but if we’re discussing the day after stuff, we need something a little wacky to put everything into perspective.  The UK Telegraph says that China is selling Obama sex dolls.  That’s just about the perfect gift for the Obot on your holiday list.   And I thought groping card board cut outs was foul.  I can’t even reach low enough for words to describe using the image of the leader of the free world for that sort of thing.

    I’m going to carry on until I feel at home!

    So what was your weirdest day after moment today?

  • News Conference Mania

    dakinikat

    Agent Orange just held a gloatfest for the press. Mississippi governor Haley Barbour and Senator Mitch McConnell joined in. Next big presser will be a presidential one.

    What can the one say now?

    I just read Ian’s call for a leftie primary challenger with a few choice representative gripers speaking up. Many missed the point completely.

    There has to be a clear voice out there to rescue the liberal identity. A real liberal and an authentic democratic voice is needed to ensure there is no public confusion between the Obama vanity agenda and what a true Democratic agenda would be.

    Let’s assess this presser together.  I’m hoping that the Democrats left standing will work to impress the base and offset any more presidential attempts to move to the right.

  • Wednesday Reads

    dakinikat

    Good Morning! 

    Welcome to Gridlock! It wasn’t an election sweep by Republicans but it wasn’t a great show by the Democratic party either. We know a few things: Agent Orange will be the House Speaker and the Senate Democratic majority has narrowed. A few good ones have fallen (e.g. Russ Feingold). A few bad ones are in (e.g. Rand Paul). And I will be less hobbled when the mighty FEDEX fleet arrives at my front door today to deliver a new harddrive for my computer and a new BlackBerry to replace the one with the dead expensive battery. Other than that, just like SCOTUS, every thing will depend on the very few folks that are willing to work to find middle ground.

    Consensus can be so elusive in a democracy.

    Here’s the take about the House take over from MSNBC.

    Still, the returns signaled a hurricane of voter discontent with Obama and Democrats in general, as Americans delivered their verdict on the president’s far-reaching health care law and economic relief efforts.

    You can only imagine what kind of images the word hurricane brings to my mind. I listened last night to the future Speaker’s remarks that represent the worst of voodoo economics. We’re in a fragile economy and thinking that a few tax cuts for the wealthy is going to heal the economy is craziness. The deficit will heal only when the economy is strong. The economy will be strong when wages are strong and the job market is strong. That’s the ‘real’ economy. Banks are just a pass through. If the Dem’s hadn’t taken their eye of the ball, the return of voodoo economics to the house would have been an impossibility.

    That is all.

    I know I said that my overwhelming feel was that all politics is local, but I have to admit that the loss of Senator Russ Feingold makes me very sad. So much for thinking there were a few places where reason prevailed.

    Feingold, one of the most liberal members of the Senate, had trailed much of the race. He was challenged by Johnson, a businessman, over his support for President Barack Obama’s healthcare overhaul, and over government spending.

    It’s not the size that matters. It’s the future growth. It’s the interest rate. It’s the state of the economy. Deficits are relative. Deficits come from many things. Balanced Budgets are not the holy grail. You shouldn’t overspend in a good economy and you shouldn’t underspend during a bad economy. I’m not sure why so many folks that think they are pro-commerce believe they know best when their economic ideology is ruled by flawed concepts, but I do know that until most politicians come in with some economic knowledge under their belt, we’re doomed.

    With all the election weirdness last night, there is one bright spot: Lexington Kentucky elected its first openly gay mayor. They may have cursed us with Rand Paul as a senator, but some parts of Kentucky see the future.

    Kentucky’s second-largest city has elected an openly gay man as its next mayor. Vice-Mayor Jim Gray was victorious tonight in his second campaign for the city’s top job, beating incumbent Mayor Jim Newberry.

    “This is a tremendous victory for Lexington, for Kentucky’s LGBT community and for fairness. We are proud of Jim Gray and his fantastic campaign staff who fought hard for this win,” said Chuck Wolfe, Victory Fund’s president and CEO.

    So, my next big question is this. Since Democrats will keep control of the Senate, what does this mean for Senate Majority Leader?  Harry Reid returns to the Senate.  Can we assume he will continue his role? 

    On a personal note, I’d like to mention that Skydancing is evolving. Two weeks ago, I looked at this as nothing more than my file cabinet. It’s now becoming a real team effort and a real community effort. The bounty of community is something I respect, appreciate, and cherish. No matter the differences or distances, there is always something we can learn from each other. Thank you for your support, your voice, and your friendship. I wish BostonBoomer and her mom a safe trip to Indiana and I look forward to a valued voice from a respected   happy friend. She has challenged me to stand up for what I believe in during times when going along seemed the easy path. She’s one strong woman and she has a voice of wisdom. When she speaks, I listen. I am so pleased that she will continue to share her voice wiith all of us. She’s got mad research skills and I’m anxiously waiting to learn more from her. 

    (Also, I just wanted you to know that I appreciate all the tips and I’m sharing it with BB just so you know. We’ve been a team for awhile and I owe a lot to her guidance. So, after some thought I  felt that any donations to skydancing shoud be team donations.)

    Okay … let’s just say when the hard drive comes in, the sharing will increase. I will be much more able to search out things so, today I am relying on community and friends! The presentation went fine. I’m sleeping in late but I know you all will make it work!

    So, what lessons do you think were learned last night? What messages were sent?

    Does it change anything?

    What’s on your reading and blogging list this morning?