Our New Favorite Portmanteau: WSJ’s “Obamanomics”
And to think I ever thought “Obamarama” sounded good — today, the Wall Street Journal runs an article titled “Seeking Clues to Obamanomics,” which takes a look at Sen. Obama’s emerging economic vision.
From the article:
The emerging picture shows a politician willing to use the government to intervene in markets to further core Democratic goals, though careful to avoid hard-edged liberal rhetoric.
One example of how the Illinois Democrat might approach economic policy is an unusual bill he first introduced to little notice shortly after entering the Senate in 2005 — and reintroduced last week. The “Health Care for Hybrids” proposal would offer federal assistance to car makers struggling with hefty retiree health-care costs in exchange for their building more fuel-efficient automobiles.
The piece has a critical tone — it did run in the conservative WSJ, after all — that stems from its general dissatisfaction with leaders who think it’s appropriate for governments to intervene in markets under any circumstances (and particularly to “further core Democratic goals,” such as ensuring that American citizens don’t freeze, starve, etc.). All I can say is thank God the WSJ wasn’t in charge of getting us out of the Great Depression.
But in general I think the article paints a fair picture of Sen. Obama’s economic stance, especially as it compares to the other candidates. It places him “somewhat to the left of New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, but to the right of former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards,” a location that strikes me as both accurate and politically advantageous.
The article also profiles some of Sen. Obama’s eminently qualified economic advisors and outlines his stated position on health care and trade. Very much worth a read if you have a chance.
April 24th, 2007 at 3:32 pm EST
Is Edwards to the left of Obama, or is he using the advantage of not being in office to *run* to the left of Obama? The last time I checked, Edwards was still on the DLC roster. Isn’t that the litmus test of a progressive Democrat?
There’s no question that Edwards’ rhetoric draws on a populist vein that is foreign to the DLC. But it would be suiced to run a DLC/centrist campaign. Hillary owns that turf. Just ask Joe Biden, wherever he is.
Edwards strategy to paint himself as the firebreathing true-believing progressive among the candidates seems to be convincing a lot of people. But it’s at odds with his record. And it’s *awfully* convenient.
April 24th, 2007 at 4:34 pm EST
Good point Riley. My sense is that Edwards is running the campaign this time around that he wished he had run in 2004. I think he really is to the left of Obama on a lot of issues, especially labor. I don’t think the populism is an act for him.
I also don’t think it’s enough to put him over the top, which is good because I also think it would hurt him in the general. In this sense, I like Obama’s positioning because it’s liberal enough for the primary, but mainstream enough for the general election. He’s walking the middle path, and I think it will pay off for him, and us, in time.