Why Obama’s polls will never tank with limousine liberals

May 27, 2014
"My will is enough!"

“Ruler of the New Versailles”

Historian Victor Davis Hanson writes at PJ Media about Obama’s poll numbers and why they’re not likely to hit the dismal late-term numbers of, say, George W. Bush or Harry Truman, in spite of the man’s obvious incompetence. While he discusses Obama’s support among minorities and the cover given him by  a protective media, it’s what he wrote about a third group, wealthy liberals, that I want to share:

 3) The well-off are indifferent to the Obama record, interested only in its symbolic resonance. Doctrinaire liberalism resonates mostly with the very wealthy. We see that by the voting patterns of our bluest counties, or the contributions of the very affluent. In contrast, Republicanism is mostly embedded within the middle class and upper middle class, while liberalism is a coalition of the affluent and the poor.

The result is that the Kerrys, Gores, and Pelosis are dittoed by millions of the affluent in Malibu, Silicon Valley, the Upper West Side, the university towns, Chicago, academia, the arts, highest finance, corporate America, foundations, the media, etc. Their income and accumulated wealth exempt them from worries about economic slowdowns, too much regulation, higher taxes, or the price of gas, electricity, or food. That under Obama gasoline has gone from $1.80 a gallon to $4.10 is as irrelevant as it is relevant that he has so far not built the Keystone Pipeline. That the price of meat has skyrocketed or that power bills are way up means little if global warming is at last addressed by more government.

For the liberal grandee, there is a margin of safety to ensure that the California legislature takes up questions like prohibiting the sale of Confederate insignia or ensuring restrooms for the transgendered or shutting down irrigated acreage to please the delta smelt. In their view, Obama represents their utopian dreams where an anointed technocracy (1), exempt from the messy ramifications of its own ideology, directs from on high a socially just society — diverse, green, non-judgmental, neutral abroad, tribal at home — in which an equality of result is ensured, albeit with proper exemptions for the better educated and more sophisticated, whose perks are necessary to give them proper downtime for their exhausting work on our behalf.

In other words, unlike the rest of us, the liberal elite can actually afford the society they want to impose on us all. For our own good.

And of such times are populist revolts born.

Footnote:
(1) Seems like VDH and I were thinking along the same lines. As usual, though, he says it a lot better than I.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Advertisements

How ObamaCare will shaft the middle-class

March 18, 2010

Quote of the day, from Scott Gottlieb:

The hardest hit won’t be those earning more than $250,000 a year–the group that he [Obama] says needs to “pay their fair share.” Rather, it’s families whose combined annual income is around $100,000 who could be crushed under this plan.

These folks will be too “rich” to qualify for ObamaCare’s subsidies, but probably too poor to easily afford the pricey insurance that the president’s plan forces them to buy.

Many of these $100K families will be obliged to buy a policy costing an average of $14,700 for the mid-level, “silver” health plan, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimates. After income taxes, they’ll be spending almost a quarter of their net income for health insurance.

Be sure to read the rest, and then call your congresscritter’s office.

(via Obi’s Sister, Potluck,  and NRO, in that order.)


Another campaign promise expires?

August 2, 2009

Hey, wait a second. Didn’t Tax-Cheat Timmy’s boss say during the campaign there would be no new taxes on the middle class? That was then, and this is now:

To get the economy back on track, will President Barack Obama have to break his pledge not to raise taxes on 95 percent of Americans? In a “This Week” exclusive, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told me, “We’re going to have to do what’s necessary.”

Geithner was clear that he believes a key component of economic recovery is deficit reduction. When I gave him several opportunities to rule out a middle class tax hike, he wouldn’t do it.

“We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically,” Geithner told me. “And that’s going to require some very hard choices.”

But…but… The One said:

Of course, the Treasury Secretary’s remarks aren’t a thundering revelation; anyone who’s looked honestly at the amount of money committed under the stimulus bill and the current budget, and the amounts needed to pay for ObamaCare realizes he can pay for it only by borrowing, printing money, or raising taxes – probably some combination of all three. What’s clear is that it can’t be paid for by taxing the rich alone. That means he must raise taxes on the middle classes during a severe recession, one of the surest ways to choke a real recovery.

And Geithner’s remarks aren’t the first hint from this administration that the “no middle-class tax hike” pledge would go under the bus: Axelrod was crossing his fingers behind his back over a month ago, as was Obama’s Press Secretary. All this is just laying the groundwork for Obama himself to eventually break his promise, regretting the need to do so while blaming Bush.

Harry Truman once said that a platform is to run on, not to stand on, but I don’t think he meant “stomp it into little pieces,” either.

LINKS: Hot Air, and Hot Air again. Byron York. Sister Toldjah.