JONATHAN CHAIT NOVEMBER 5, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
The award for Most Hilariously Propagandistic Election Interpretation, at least in the non-elected official category, goes to Charles Krauthammer. Here's the Fox News All-Star and Washington Post columnist explaining the 2010 result:
Our two most recent swing cycles were triggered by unusually jarring historical events. The 2006 Republican "thumpin'" (to quote George W. Bush) was largely a reflection of the disillusionment and near-despair of a wearying war that appeared to be lost. And 2008 occurred just weeks after the worst financial collapse in eight decades.
Similarly, the massive Republican swing of 2010 was a reaction to another rather unprecedented development...
You mean the gravest economic crisis since the Depression, right? Combined with overstretched majorities deep into GOP districts created by the previous two elections? Both of which made it essentially certain that Republicans would win back the House even in models that took no account whatsoever of the president's popularity? No, let's let Krauthammer continue with the unprecedented development that caused the 2010 result:
- a ruling party spectacularly misjudging its mandate and taking an unwilling country through a two-year experiment in hyper-liberalism.
Ah. So the 2006 and 2008 elections were a reaction to circumstances. The 2010 election was an expression of ideological conviction. The collapse of Lehman Brothers and the prospect of future rising unemployment had a huge effect upon the electorate, argues Krauthammer, but the reality of skyrocketing unemployment in 2010 is not worth mentioning. Gotcha.
7 comments
Not quite related to this post, but as if by some cruel twist of fate, stocks are at their highest level since the Lehman Brothers collapse, and the economy added 151,000 jobs in October. Could have used this news oh, about a week ago. Now Republicans will say that the market is responding to their victory, and not to the stimulus that the Fed is pumping into the economy. http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/05/markets/premarkets/index.htm
- dubyadoubte
November 5, 2010 at 9:36am
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/03/AR2010110303844.html http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/11/condescending_left Maybe you'll like these better.......
- Robert Powell
November 5, 2010 at 9:39am
Not only does Krauthammer ignore the biggest factor in how people voted, his asserted reason--a reaction against "hyper-liberalism"--is bunk. What hyper-liberalism is he talking about? Is he talking about health care reform? You know, that reform that was modeled on what hyper-liberal Republicans offered in the 1990s, where single payer wasn't even on the table, the public option was dropped, and the result was endorsed by those hyper-liberals Bob Dole and Bill Frist among other former Republican representatives? Is he talking about cap and trade, which never made it into law and in any case was supported by that hyper-liberal John McCain during his presidential campaign? Is he talking about allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire at least for the wealthy, which would return them to the levels we had during the years of the hyper-liberal Clinton administration? Is he talking about the bank bailout, which was instituted by the hyper-liberal Bush and supported by those hyper-liberals Mitch McConnell and John Boehner? Is he talking about the stimulus, which was of moderate size, apparently a one-time expense, and most of which was tax cuts and aid to the states? One of the failures of the Obama administration going into this election was allowing it to be painted as left-wing, allowing hacks like Krauthammer to make such assertions when there's practically nothing to back them up. Unfortunately, much of the public has bought into that narrative too--even if it wasn't the primary driver of the election results.
- dsimon
November 5, 2010 at 10:26am
- I know he must have friends in the TNR tribe but he's gotten stranger by the years. And I've seen this movie before...
- michaelg
November 5, 2010 at 11:45am
Charles Krauthammer is nothing more than a hack and a flack for the Republican Party any more. It wasn't always like this. I have read that he answers just about every letter sent to him. I have thought of writing him and telling him that his decline is sad to see; he is the consummate ideologue these days, always to be counted on to demonize the Democrats reflexively and overlook the sins of the right.
- liberal reformer
November 5, 2010 at 12:32pm
Robert Powell -- the first of those (the Will column) was already roundly (and, I think, reasonably) mocked by Chait yesterday, so I don't think you're going to get very far there.
- frippo
November 5, 2010 at 2:58pm
You're probably right frippo. I persist because I think a lack of objective self-critical analysis has been a signature Democratic Party handicap for decades, and should be attempted if we are to avoid going back to single-party Republican rule in two years time.
- Robert Powell
November 5, 2010 at 6:01pm