How do you get a revolution with the highest economic confidence in 20 years?

[Recursion]

https://news.gallup.com/poll/283940/economic-confidence-highest-point-2000.aspx

The current conditions component score of +54 is the result of 62% of Americans saying the economy is "excellent" or "good" and 8% describing it as "poor." Meanwhile, the economic outlook component score of +26 is the result of 59% saying the economy is "getting better" and 33% saying it is "getting worse."

Gallup's tracking of economic confidence over the past 28 years has recorded index readings at or above the +40 mark in just nine other measurements, all between 1998 and 2000 -- with the highest level recorded in January 2000, at +56, after a then-record high for the Dow. The latest reading of +40 is the only time the index has reached that level since 2000. With the exception of a few notable gains and losses, the years of 2001 to 2006 reflected generally neutral confidence in the economy, as the index yo-yoed between positive and negative territory. In 2007, economic confidence turned decidedly negative, with the index generating subzero readings for eight straight years during the bursting of the housing bubble, Great Recession, financial collapse and slow recovery. The index gradually recovered in the years that followed, finally registering a positive figure again in 2015. Since 2017, the index has ranged between +13 and +33, until the latest figure.

Another indicator of Americans' eased concerns about the economy comes from Gallup's open-ended measure of the greatest problem facing the U.S. For five-and-a-half years, between March 2008 and September 2013, large majorities of Americans named the economy -- or some issue related to it, such as unemployment, taxes or federal debt -- as the most important problem facing the country. This included a high of 86% naming some economic issue in February 2009.

As the U.S. economy continued to improve between 2014 and today, Americans became less likely to name economic issues as the country's greatest problem. The latest reading of 10% is, by one percentage point, the lowest Gallup has found since it began compiling mentions of economic issues in 2001.

I know this is difficult for a lot of people to believe, but it's going to be very hard to run a campaign based on economic distress, because there isn't that much of it. People just aren't that concerned about the economy.

They weren't that concerned about the economy in 2016, either: Hillary Clinton won voters who listed the economy as their chief concern 60-40. The problem is there weren't enough of those; she lost voters who listed immigration as their chief concern 90-10.

We do not look like a party gearing up to take down an incumbent during a strong economy. I don't know why we don't. I don't know why we are acting like there's this huge national groundswell to remake the economy. There isn't.

[emmaverybo]

1. Democracy is in distress. That's been Biden's message out of the gate.

[pangaia]

2. I don't know the ansewer to the question but..

"....62% of Americans saying the economy is "excellent" or "good" and 8% describing it as "poor."
means that 62% of americans are ignorant ,stupid, not paying attention or all three.

[Recursion]

11. Why do you say that?

Unemployment is low, wages are rising as fast as they have in the past half-century. If we didn't have a maniac in the White House starting trade wars right and left I'd call this the best economy of my lifetime.

[pangaia]

13. "Employment is low" only because so many people are forced to work part-time

jobs with shitty salaries, little or no health insurance.
EVEN colleges and universities use a disgraceful number of 'adjutant ' teachers because it is cheaper--- forcing those teachers to have 2-3 positions and or other jobs to stay alive.

Hate to use walfart as an example bit those people working there are considered 'employed." !!!


And salaries are NOT 'rising' for those who really need it to rise...

[Recursion]

20. Not really, that's 3% of the workforce

3% of the workforce is employed part time but wants to be employed full time. That number was 10% a decade ago.

Hate to use walfart as an example bit those people working there are considered 'employed." !!!

And WalMart is rolling out a $13 national minimum wage for all employees this year; their average wage for store employees is about $20/hour. That's a lot higher than all the mom & pop small businesses they killed ever paid anybody.

And salaries are NOT 'rising' for those who really need it to rise...

I mean, they are though. That's one of the main reasons the American people aren't very worried about the economy, as this poll shows.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. Economic inequality is the issue

People do feel that. working 2-3 jobs may be profitable but it's not fun.

[Recursion]

5. But working multiple jobs is at its lowest level on record

About 8% of the workforce has multiple jobs, and that counts people who are starting a new one while finishing up an old one. Back in the 90s that number was in the teens. It's less common than it's been in the past.

[BannonsLiver]

8. Americans are known to care about an array of issues.

We’re also known to be completely unable or unwilling to do anything about any of them. Especially if doing something about it costs us something.

[unblock]

4. recession is coming

starting to look like it might not happen in time to affect the election but who knows.

but i agree in terms of policy. i get why these issues come up during the primary, but as soon as the nominee pivots to the general, they should switch to defending democracy, restoring honor and dignity, getting rid of corruption, return to law and order, etc.

[Recursion]

6. Crossing our fingers and hoping for a recession isn't a strategy

We can cross that bridge if and when we come to it.

[unblock]

10. i'm neither hoping for it nor counting on it as a strategy

as i said, our general election strategy should be focused on other things, mainly a return to normalcy.

if we actually have a recession, we won't need to overthink it. donnie and the republicans will do *very* poorly if a proper recession hits by summertime.

[brooklynite]

9. Voters are concerned about the economy, but not to the point of "revolution".

Think of all the posts here wondering why there's never a "general strike" in the offing?

[AtheistCrusader]

17. If not recession, interest in the federal debt.

It's going to be a problem, soon. A BIG problem, because nobody seems to be paying attention to it.

[unblock]

19. in truth, the next presidency is quite likely to be a disaster.

i'd certainly rather have a democrat at the helm when the sh*t hits the fan, but whoever is in office is going to be blamed.

all the ingredients are there for a major, widespread recession. it's not going to be pretty. we just don't know when. the fed can keep things going until after november if they are so inclined, but certainly not another 4 years.

[Recursion]

21. I agree with you there

This next term is something of a poison chalice

[AtheistCrusader]

31. Yeah, a lot of cows are going to come home to roost in the next 4/5 years.

And of course, the irrational public will blame the president, despite the previous president being the guy that lit the fuse on the thing that should not be lit.

[unblock]

32. lol @ roosting cows

[AtheistCrusader]

34. They're VERY annoying and very hard to move.

[unblock]

35. you misspelled moooooove

[DanTex]

7. There's a difference between economic cycles and the structure of the economy in general.

[YOHABLO]

12. The economy is good for those making money off of their money.

[pangaia]

14. BINGO !!!!!! THANK YOU....

[Recursion]

15. It's also very good for people making money off their labor

Wages at every quintile all the highest they have ever been, as are household incomes. We've had now 5 straight years of rising real wages, even faster than the vaunted golden era of the 60s. We've got construction sites stalled out all over the country because they can't fill their positions at $35/hour. There are factories in Youngstown -- Youngstown -- that have had to double their starting wage to poach workers from other factories because there aren't the people to do the jobs they need done, and they're still pulling double shifts because the number of jobs exceeds the number of applicants.

Wages for the poorest fifth of workers have seen their biggest increase ever over the past few years, as multiple states have increased the minimum wage and huge employers like Amazon and WalMart have increased their internal minimum wages (WalMart is at $13 nationally, Amazon is at $15).

4 years ago we fell into a trap. We played along with the idea that we were in some kind of economic dystopia because that belief was necessary for some people's ideologies. Trump will absolutely not play along with that this time around; he's not going to make the same mistake we did.

Barring a recession, we aren't going to win on economic issues.

[YOHABLO]

24. Granted wages have gone up. But the offset is health care and food.

[unblock]

23. it's good, right up until it isn't.

[TheRealNorth]

16. Like Reagan did in the 80's

Last edited Tue Jan 28, 2020, 06:43 PM - Edit history (1)

We are stimulating the economy via deficit spending. While that may be okay during economic downturns to prevent recession/depression, Trump is doing it to juice the economic numbers and figures he will be long gone when the bill is due.

[YOHABLO]

25. Yeah, he'll do anything to superficially make himself look wonderful.

[Sloumeau]

18. You talk to people about how they are doing personally.

People say the economy is good because the stock market is high and the unemployment rate was low. Yet, when adjusted for inflation, most people aren't making any more than people were in 1973, and when you factor in how much more things cost like housing and college, plus how many jobs no longer offer retirement benefits or health benefits, many are actually doing worse. How do you beat that, you ask people if they think they can retire with a decent-sized nest egg. You ask them if they think they will have enough money to send their kids to good schools. You ask people if they think they are doing as well as they should, and if they think that too much money is going to the rich and not to people like them.

[Recursion]

22. But they are making more than in 1973; that talking point is 10 years out of date

You ask people if they think they are doing as well as they should

I don't need to: Gallup did. This is the answer, as much as it bugs a lot of people.

[YOHABLO]

26. What answer?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

27. This is a seriously important question and if we lose in November, this will be a big part of it.

People are working. That's what matters to them.

[OhZone]

28. Almost everyone I know -

Is struggling. Huge debt. Big companies not promoting or giving raises or bonuses like they used to.

But maybe that's just in NJ?

[Fresh_Start]

29. there was a DU post a couple of weeks ago was talking about the New Deal

imaging somehow that FDR was able to accomplish the New Deal purely by the strength of his vision.
I responded the New Deal had a lot to do with the Great Depression than it did with FDR personality.
Both had to happen simultaneously to make a difference.

[redqueen]

30. I'm confused. 78% of us live paycheck to paycheck.

Just this morning I heard an add for some new kind of credit card for which the tagline was something like 'we all have trouble paying all our bills' or something.

Sure the economy is roaring and lots of people are doing great - but many more people are not doing so great.

Now, that doesn't mean that I think most of those who aren't doing so great think a 'revolution' is the best way to improve things, but still...

[Blue_true]

39. What I see is an economy that is one event from disaster.

People are not doing ok. One of my brothers runs a repair business. He is able to find mechanics pretty easily that take piece-hour work.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

33. I'm getting good. I knew who it was before I opened

Ask the people rationing insulin. Ask the people camping out in a parking lot for three days to get seen by a doctor. Ask the people who can’t scrape up $400 dollars in an emergency. Ask the 70 year olds still working lousy jobs. Ask the people swamped in student loans. Ask the people struggling with subprime auto loans or payday loans.

[Recursion]

36. Yeah, Gallup asked. That's literally the point of this post

Gallup asked a broad cross-section of the population, and found that they don't think or feel the way we wish they did.

[ck4829]

40. Hey! Those people don't really matter... only pay attention to the people who are doing fine

Didn't you know that?

... from me at least.

[Recursion]

42. That's probably the 8% who described the economy as "poor"

I mean, this is why Gallup asks these questions, you know?

The problem is 8% isn't enough to win an election.

[Gothmog]

45. Could you explain to me how sanders voter revolution works in the real world?

I have never taken sanders seriously due to a complete lack of legislative accomplishments of sanders and the fact that I do not understand sanders voter revolution The NYT also did not understand how sanders voter revolution works

Link to tweet

Like the NYT, I have questions about this voter revolution concept. I have asked sanders supporters to explain this concept to me and so far no one seems to know how this voter revolution will work in the real world https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=430371

Gothmog (78,308 posts)
64. Exactly how does sanders voter revolution work in the real world?

It is my understanding that even sanders has acknowledged that he cannot adopt his platform unless he holds rallies and this voter revolution occurs. Is this correct? How does this voter revolution work in the real world? Again as I understand this concept, so many new voters will rise up and force the GOP to be reasonable. Is this correct? How many new voters does it take to accomplish this goal and where are these voters? How will these new voters force the GOP to be reasonable when so many GOP officeholders are in gerrymandered districts? Will these new voters move to these districts in time to vote for sanders’ platform? If these new voters are real, then why are theses new voters not showing up in the polls? New voters in such large numbers so as to cause the GOP to be reasonable should show up in polling. Are these new voters waiting for something? If these new voters really exist in the real world, why has sanders not used these new voters to get some meaningful legislation passed?

I look forward to answers to these questions

sanders interview with the NYT may have gone better if he had explained how this revolution would work in the real world. I am still curious

[thesquanderer]

37. re:"acting like there's this huge national groundswell to remake the economy. There isn't."

It's a reasonable position, though kind of ironic coming from a Yang supporter, since Universal Basic Income and Human-Centered Capitalism comprise probably the biggest fundamental economic shift proposed by any of our candidates.

But yes, we do have a challenge, not just how to promote revolutionary change (whoever's it is) when the economy is doing well, but even merely *winning* when the economy is doing well (or is perceived as such), regardless of proposed economic policies.

[Recursion]

38. Yang's remake is the remake I like best

But that fact doesn't actually mean the public is anxious about the economy. A VAT+UBI has immense social impacts but keeps "the economy" in the macro sense running pretty much like it does now.

[ck4829]

41. "Despite the strong economy"... As long as you ignore all the asterisks

[Recursion]

43. Perception of the economy is what matters in an election

And this perception isn't one we want to run on.

We could do what Trump did, and drum up resentment about the economy, but it probably won't work because he won't make the mistake we did of playing along. Note the graph: outlook was positive until election season. We were stupid; we shouldn't have granted the premise that the economy was broken.

[Gothmog]

44. Opinion: If the economy keeps its momentum, 2020 will be Trump's to lose

If trump does not destroy the Obama recovery, then 2020 will be a very close election. I reject the concept that we can afford to nominate a weak/far left nominee. trump will beat a far left candidate easily if the economy remains strong

Link to tweet

One wonders whether, at some point, the economic boom will be so huge that it will drive opinions on its own. Once Democrats settle on a nominee, voters will have to make a choice: Do they stick with the guy they’ve got, warts and all, who has contributed to such good times? Or are they willing to take the risk that the next president, even if he or she is a better person, will screw things up with a new agenda?

One election model from Alan Abramowitz, a political scientist at Emory University, suggests the economy will be the winning factor. His “time for change” model has a solid track record in predicting the outcome and direction of presidential races, and data he published last month show that, so long as the economy continues to grow at a 2 percent clip, Trump should be a favorite for reelection even if his job approval rating is as poor as it is now.

Indeed, it’s even better than that for Trump. The model calculates an average gain of 2.5 electoral votes for every one-point Trump shaves off of his net job disapproval. According to the model, even if gross domestic product growth slumps to 1 percent, Trump could win the minimum 270 electoral votes he needs for reelection by lowering his net job disapproval rating to 7 percent. Right now, that number is around 10 percent.

Media attention is focused on the Mueller report and other congressional investigations. But if the economy keeps its momentum, even that or Trump’s failure to trumpet his success might not prevent him from winning a second term.