Today McCain appeared behind empty shelves talking about the economy. Neither his words (or imagery) were strong enough. Frank Luntz says voters want McCain to be more passionate…here is his chance to really move the needle.
FDR spoke to people’s hearts in the Depression.before he advocated policy recommendations. What do we STILL recall from his fireside chats: “We have nothing to fear but fear itself.” He united the nation with his inner strength.
Under the anger on Main Street is fear and confusion…fear about “what will happen to me” and confusion about why this all is happening. The candidate who speaks courageously to this fear will own this issue.
This FIRESIDE CHAT format fits McCain’s strengths. It takes his war hero resilience and spiritual stature and applies it to the economy.
These talks should be short. One topic per segment. A series of at least 10, each covering an aspect of the situation. ((I am actually working on such a list, I’m starting an internet radio show to explore this crisis. It’s a great idea but MUCH MORE POWERFUL IF MCCAIN DOES IT.))
For each topic, he should picture in his mind an actual person who will lose his job, life savings, and way of life. Today’s talk missed hitting voters right in the gut. He can do it and he must do it to win.
If this is of interest, I give it away freely. This is the most important crisis of my lifetime and if I can help in any way, I am honored to do so.
I will write my heart out for McCain — that is what I do. I’m a Rust Belt survivor who never wants others to go through the economic pain that comes with business falling apart all around us.
These angry folks opposing the bailout just haven’t a clue. And those who think the statist, leftist Obama knows about economic leadership…see the next post.
by admin on September 30, 2008
in Obama
Last week, Obama economic adviser Jason Furman Washington Posttold the Washington Post: “This [bailout] is a major fiscal problem in the short run, but it doesn’t alter the long-term fiscal picture.”
Furman comes across as tone deaf to the larger economic concerns of voters, focusing on the fact that the government won’t go broke doing the bailout. I don’t think anyone thinks it will. It’s not the FISCAL (government) problem that the candidates need to address…..
it’s getting across to the American people that this bailout isn;t going to bankrupt them through higher taxes. That this bailout is about restoring the financial system that we all depend on everyday. That not doing the bailout makes about as much sense as stopping running the subway in New York…the cure is a lot worse than the disease.
The Democratic Congress, and Democratic economists such as Furman just don’t seem to get it.
The context of Furman’s remarks is this remark from Obama:
“After this immediate problem, we’ve got the long-term fundamentals that will really make sure this economy grows.”
Obama mocked McCain for saying the same thing in January of this year. His top economic advisers agree with McCain. And his political advisers seem to be letting the candidate pick up McCain’s message.
OBAMA: NOT READY TO LEAD.
Washington Post business columnist Steven Pearlstein has a fantastic idea to let the very US banks causing the financial meltdown — not US taxpayers — to shoulder most of the risk of the urgently needed bailout.
His insight: Instead of paying cash to those banks in exchange for their bad investments — the government would take them off the books of those banks by ISSUING PREFERRED SHARES IN A NEW GOVERNMENT-OWNED RESCUE CORPORATION.
The government would capitalize that corporation with $100 billion in cash (taxpayer funds). It would buy and hold troubled securities until the market restabilized. It would then sell the securities those banks holding them would reap the gains. The government could go ahead and redeem (buy back) the shares at any time. Banks could count the shares as part of the capital they need to hold. Credit crunch solved.
I quote :
The beauty of this arrangement is that, rather than protecting taaxpayers by having the government take an ownership stake in hundreds privately owned banks, it would be the banks that would own a stake of the government’s rescue vehicle. The government would suffer the first $100 billion in losses from buying and selling the asset-backed securities, but any further losses would be borne by the other shareholders.
And lest this become fodder for high stakes debate, Pearlstein reminds us of what is at stake:
…all it would take is one more hit to trigger the modern-day equivalent of a nationwide bank run. Financial institutions would fail, part of your savings would be wiped out, jobs would be lost, and a lot of economic activity would grind to a halt. Such a debacle would cost us a lot more than $700 billion.
Who is going to step up and save us from that scenario — George Bush? Harry Reid? Nancy Pelosi? John McCain? BarackObama? Barney Frank (grrrr….more on him later)? The Democratic-controlled House and Senate? The dissident Republicans?
Pearlstein’s plan is pure genius and it gets around the tough politcal obstaclesd that have the nation tied in knots. Let’s spread the word — this plan is the best idea I have seen to put the risk of calamity far behind us.
Please (a) comment, (b) forward this blog post to your elected representatives, (c) forward it to your friends, and (d) tweet it if you are on Twitter, and (e) use your other social networking platforms as well. I’m on it right now – please join me!
WHEN THE POST PUBLISHES HIS COLUMN TO WASHINGTONPOST.COM….I will add the link.
