Skip to main content

Home/ Dole Group/ Group items tagged lessons

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Jonah Schacter

Sandy and Chris Christie: Lessons from Hurricane Betsy in 1965. - Slate Magazine - 4 views

www.slate.com/...m_hurricane_betsy_in_1965.html

lessons hurricane obama federal election

shared by Jonah Schacter on 04 Nov 12 - No Cached
  • Jonah Schacter on 04 Nov 12
     
    This article shows that in times of need the federal government can really help states. With hurricane Sandy the majority of New Jersey was destroyed and the republican governor Chris Christie was welcome to the federal aid that was given. If Romney was president at the time of the hurricane he would have left it up to the states to rebuild themselves. Sandy is a clear example of how the federal government is for the benefit of the country its inhabitants. The author also brings up Hurricane Betsy, which took place in 1965 and how the governor of Louisiana (who once thought about seceding from the country) realized how the federal government is a necessity in this country. 
  • ...2 more comments...
  • John West on 07 Nov 12
     
    The whole Chris Christie response has been fascinating to me during the Sandy aftermath. The way he completely shifted on Obama was really clear on the news clip I saw, where his agressive attack on Obama's ability to lead the country was superimposed with his really profound praise for him during FEMA. I agree with what you're saying about Sandy saying something real about the rhetoric of government spending. It's one thing to criticize government programs like FEMA during a period of calm, and much, much harder when they are being implemented effectively right in front of you. In the end, though, Christie's switch might not have been much of a switch at all. As someone mentioned in class, FEMA is already in large part state run and in large part private. He was likely showing a better understanding of it.
  • cody s on 08 Nov 12
     
    This is an interesting article. You could (for fun, not really as a legitimate exercise) expand this as a metaphor for the problem with conservatism: it works for the rich, or the people unaffected by the hurricane, but to the poor and the hurricane-affected liberal philosophy is clearly superior. I wonder how much Sandy and Christie actually helped Obama - I read somewhere that Obama jumped a whole percentage point the day after Christie praised him, though who really can ever explain a poll bounce with any certainty.
  • Anna Schutte on 09 Nov 12
     
    It is important to keep in mind the difference between FEMA's response to Katrina during the Bush Administration when it was led by someone who had little disaster experience and FEMA's response to Sandy. This article shows that when political rhetoric is dropped, people do want government to help with disasters. It would seem that government organizations during administrations that take government roles seriously are more likely to have strong government services. I guess that might be wishful thinking.
  • Eli Melrod on 11 Nov 12
     
    I pretty much agree with what all you guys are saying. I think Hurricane Sandy has been a good reminder of the need for government services and problem we have with climate change. Hopefully, people will learn from this horrific storm.
Eli Melrod

The Elephant in the Room - 5 views

campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/...uthat-the-elephant-in-the-room

romney campaign

shared by Eli Melrod on 12 Sep 12 - No Cached
  • Eli Melrod on 12 Sep 12
     
    This article stood out to me, because it is exactly why I see Romney's plans as a completely the opposite of what American needs: they aren't any different than George W. Bush's. Americans saw what happened under George W. Bush, and nobody wants to go back to that. This line in the piece really summed up why Romney is doing so poorly, "To win the kind of victory that conservatives seem to think they should be winning, the Republican Party needs two things: A domestic agenda that offers more to hard-pressed families than just generic conservative rhetoric about the genius of capitalism, and a foreign policy program that reflects the hard lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan." As a liberal, I would never vote for Mitt Romney, but I do understand that the economy is not where a lot of people wanted it to be after Obama's first term. The question is: can Romney do a better job? I see a lot of similarities between Romney's policies and George W. Bush's policies, so I think that the economy would do worse. If other Americans, like the author of this article, see the same similarities, I don't see how Romney can win in November.
  • ...2 more comments...
  • John West on 16 Sep 12
     
    I think learning from Bush-era policies, like you said, is the best way to figure out what to do (or not do). When we talked in class about how complicated and unrelatable fiscal policy is, I kept wondering what ideology *actually* works and how we can be certain. Looking back on past failures seems like the only way to relly know. If we implement the policies you're talking about, which arguably led to the recession, why should we expect something different? I don't know that much about economics, but I agree with you. If Bush's fiscal policy is what really did set the stage for the economy to tank, I can't discern big enough differences in Romney's platform - "generic conservative rhetoric" - to expect something better. If anything, the article describes Romney's plan as a watered-down version of Bush's, which raises different concerns for me.
  • Anna Schutte on 17 Sep 12
     
    It is always interesting to hear about Republican positions like the idea that Romney is not doing well because "left controlled education shaped the Millennials." There is probably something to this. Also, I agree with Eli as far as the specifics that Romney and Ryan have offered so far. They sound just like George W. Bush and it is pretty clear that politically he needs to separate himself from Bush. I just read and posted an article on the effect of tax cuts on economic growth. It is pretty clear that historically tax cuts have not done much to improve growth. However, this article says that the Republicans acknowledge the failings of the Bush plan and promise more responsibility. Maybe they do know they need to offer more and will hear about tax reform and other things in the debates. It is pretty clear from Romney's behavior this week that he is not taking a more nuanced position on foreign policy.
  • Cameron G on 17 Sep 12
     
    I think it is interesting, and absurd, how the Republican Party has looked for things to blame on some of their failings on. That being said, I also think it is unfair that past President's records affect prospective candidates chances, on either side of the political spectrum. Just because Romney is in the same political party as Bush dos not mean he will do similar things(even though he probably will do some). I agree with Anna that Romney and Ryan need to separate from Bush to establish that they are not the same and will not have the same results. Regardless of their policies I believe that candidates should be evaluated on their merits, and while the past should be considered, and their merits alone. To me, that is what this article is really saying.
  • cody s on 19 Sep 12
     
    Cameron, I agree with your idea - that parties can shift, and individual candidates shouldn't be bound into the economic principles of their party - but until Romney provides substantive plans for the economy, all anyone is going to hear from his campaign is the same conservative "free market" rhetoric that they heard from the Bush campaign. What he needs to do is lay out a specific plan and note what he's learned from the economic failure under Bush and how that has shaped his plan.
1 - 2 of 2
Showing 20▼ items per page