- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,718
- Reaction score
- 35,498
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
That's been my impression of the coverage of the shutdown: The folks you see on TV are much too sure of themselves. They've been making too much of thin slices of polling and thinner historical precedents that might not apply this time around. There's been plenty of bull****, in other words. We really don't know all that much about how the shutdown is going to be resolved, or how the long-term political consequences are going to play out.
So what can we say? What follows are a series of points that I consider to be on relatively firm ground. Some are critiques of the conventional wisdom; some are points of context; some concern relatively fine details of the situation; some are obvious things that I don't think have been emphasized quite enough. None of them constitute a prediction of how the shutdown is going to turn out, or exactly what the political fallout will be. But perhaps they can serve as useful guidance as you read coverage of the shutdown elsewhere.
1. The media is probably overstating the magnitude of the shutdown's political impact.
2. The impact of the 1995-96 shutdowns is overrated in Washington's mythology.
3. Democrats face extremely unfavorable conditions in trying to regain the House.
4. The polling data on the shutdown is not yet all that useful, and we lack data on most important measures of voter preferences.
5. President Obama's change in tactics may be less about a change of heart and more about a change in incentives.
6. The increasing extent of GOP partisanship is without strong recent precedent, and contributes to the systemic uncertainty about political outcomes.
There is no way to accurately assess the true results of the "shutdown" because our childlike president has created a huge number of artificial shutdown results to punish the American people for not letting him have his way. Who can say what the real results, if any, might be?
Certainly not such things as blocking off one side of the highway so nobody can see Mt. Rushmore.
Which didn't happen.
snopes.com: Spiteful Obama Blocks Off View of Mt. Rushmore
Let us attempt to retain a semblance of honesty. The Snopes article says Obama didn't cover Mt. Rushmore with a sheet held up by a helicopter.
Nate Silver had an interesting piece up over at the temporary home of FiveThirtyEight, on the Grantland site. In it, he gives his views regarding the coverage and ramifications of the shut down. Some of this thoughts:
He goes into detail on all of those 6 points at the actual article, which you can find linked HERE
Some on the left seem to be championing to the hills the notion that this is essentially the end of the Republican Party and that they've committed electoral suicide. On the flip side, some on the right seem to think that this will actually help the Republicans because people are supposedly so against ACA and are upset with how the shutdown is being handled.
However, from reading Silver's piece it seems he has a view that the negative effect will be relatively light compared to the way that it's being made out in much of the media at the moment. What is your take on Silver's views?
Read the whole thing. Your post is still wrong.
I did read the whole thing. People can still see Mount Rushmore.
I did read the whole thing. People can still see Mount Rushmore.
Did you see the picture of the highway cone barriers and the last sentence that says the best viewing sites have been blocked?
Yep. You said "nobody can see Mount Rushmore." This is false.
That said, this is a government shutdown. The National Park Service is part of the government.
If there's one thing the last couple elections have shown, it's that Nate Silver is really, really good at math.
And I tend to agree with him here. People have short attention sp
Nate Silver had an interesting piece up over at the temporary home of FiveThirtyEight, on the Grantland site. In it, he gives his views regarding the coverage and ramifications of the shut down. Some of this thoughts:
He goes into detail on all of those 6 points at the actual article, which you can find linked HERE
Some on the left seem to be championing to the hills the notion that this is essentially the end of the Republican Party and that they've committed electoral suicide. On the flip side, some on the right seem to think that this will actually help the Republicans because people are supposedly so against ACA and are upset with how the shutdown is being handled.
However, from reading Silver's piece it seems he has a view that the negative effect will be relatively light compared to the way that it's being made out in much of the media at the moment. What is your take on Silver's views?
Personally, I think this so called shutdown is one of the most overhyped political stories in recent history. The vast majority of the federal government is still up and running and hardly anyone's lives have been dramatically impacted by the areas that have been "shutdown". Reminds me of the scary "draconian" sequester budget cuts were all told to fear which seem to have been implemented without causing an economic apocalypse. Frankly, I hope the shutdown drags on and on and people might realize, "Hey, we're getting along just fine without this extra spending. Maybe we should make some of these cuts permanent." But I'm probably hoping for too much there. :roll:
There is probably alot of truth in that. With elections being over a year away, I doubt this is going to be a major factor in them. We have seen, time and again, that when the issues are laid out, the one the majority of people vote on is economic issues(Nov 2012 it was 59 % considered it the most important issue, health care was second at 18 %), which unless this drags on an extended period of time won't be a factor next November. Barring something shocking, Democrats are not going to regain the house in 2014 will struggle at best to retain the senate. The polling data only really shows that people are unhappy about the shutdown and every one is taking a hit in some polls. GOP partisanship is through the roof to the point of almost being a parody.
Point 5 is interesting but I hate trying to guess motivations for people. They tend to be complex and opaque.
If you take a critical view of Obama's first term, it was all about not rocking the boat and avoiding political controversy at all cost. Again, the perfect example of this was his absence in the healthcare debate.
It was like watching a boxer who's strategy is to not lose, as opposed for one working towards victory
So he wasn't ramming a radical leftist agenda down our throats?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?