View Poll Results: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • The CE is "the man". He steers it all.

    1 3.23%
  • The CE may not be a dictator, but still desreves the bulk of the blame/credit.

    4 12.90%
  • The CE sets "the tone", but has little actual influence.

    17 54.84%
  • The CE has virtually no influence whatsoever.

    3 9.68%
  • Other?

    6 19.35%
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 86

Thread: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

  1. #11
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    so all the smart people agree with you? I call BS. You've got lots of conservative intellectuals who don't believe that crap.
    There are a few, but not many. Many of these same people were supportive of stimulus measures when Bush was president, and they'll be supportive of them again during the next Republican presidency. You can even see it now, because this mindset has not yet trickled down to all of the old talking points: "We can't afford to raise taxes in a bad economy," and "World War II cured the Great Depression." Apparently conservatives using these talking points haven't yet gotten the memo that the talking points have changed, since Keynesian stimulus is suddenly taboo.

    However, I find your argument unique. You are suggesting that Republican Congresscritters will nobly do what is right despite the fact that they will be thrown from office for it. Color me suspicious.
    No, I'm suggesting that Republican Congresscritters will do what they know perfectly well benefits the economy, when they are the ones being held accountable for the state of the economy. It has nothing to do with "nobly doing what is right," it has to do with their own reelection. And might I suggest that presiding over a bad economy is more toxic to their reelection chances than passing a stimulus bill (which would have, at most, tepid opposition from right-wing pundits if it's done under a Republican's watch).

    I think you grossly overestimate the Republican Party's desire for ideological consistency, and grossly underestimate its tribalism. Many posters on this very message board, who swear up and down to be conservatives and despise any stimulus signed by Obama, would be the first to defend such a stimulus under a Romney presidency.

    that is correct, and along with the attempt to impose amnesty, sparked the Tea Party. Stimulus spending is no longer an acceptable platform for a Republican any more than an individual healthcare mandate. To suggest it is effectively to announce that you are retiring/switching parties.
    Stimulus doesn't seem to provoke the same outrage among Republicans as an individual mandate does. (For that matter, even the individual mandate doesn't provoke any outrage if it's suggested by a Republican. Did you know that there's an individual mandate in Paul Ryan's budget for Medicare? Neither did anyone else.)

    And in any case, they could just create some lovely euphemism if they didn't want to call it a "stimulus," or concoct some rationale for why it's different than Obama's stimulus. That would be sufficient to calm the nerves of Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, and the like. They certainly aren't going to go to war with the Republican Party over an economic stimulus.

    well we'll see. But I think you are living in a bubble if you think Republicans are going to be able to get away with Stimulus Spending, especially anything larger than that last pile of crap.
    There is no doubt in my mind that the Republican Party will instantly change its tune about a number of things, the minute there is a Republican president. Foremost among them are economic stimulus and deficit spending. The historical track record of Republicans supporting contractionary fiscal policies when THEY are the ones in power is...not very good, to say the least.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 07-03-12 at 12:10 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  2. #12
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    Depends on how far Congress is willing to go along with him.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  3. #13
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy? "Chief Executive" (CE), for this debate, is meant to be President of the United States, and/or the governor of a state.

    Using the current national economy as an example, though the same concept could apply to a state government as well...

    Is the state of the current economy Obama's fault? His supporters claim he's doing a good job, yet when it's pointed out the economy still sucks his supporters blame Congress (specifically Republicans and filibusters) for thwarting his moves. Hold on... doesn't that mean that the CE does not have the influence necessary to steer the economy? I mean, if Obama's so good, the economy would be better by now, in spite of Congress, wouldn't it?

    This begs the question: Is President Obama the man in charge and with the influence necessary to steer the economy, or not?

    If it is Congress and not the CE, then doesn't this let Bush II off the hook as well? After all, it's Congress, not the CE that has the influence, right?

    If it is Congress that wields the power and influence, then how much does it matter *who* the President is?

    Bottom line: If you want to blame Bush II for getting us in this mess, fine, but then Obama is also to blame for keeping us in this mess. If you want to absolve Obama of blame due to an uncooperative Congress, ok, but then Bush II is absolved of blame as well. Where's the the consistency in assessing blame and/or taking credit?

    Wall street runs the economy...by wall street I mean the rich powerful investors and the big corporate interests...They control us by holding back lending, increasing rates and prices and not hiring. The shoot up the price of oil which in turn shoots up the price of everything, from surcharges by my garbage hauler to the supermarket.
    The president has ZERO to do with all that...nada thing

  4. #14
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,576

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    The president trying to control congress is like herding cats, it keeps you very busy and accomplishes nothing at all. The problem with congress is that they ALL work for campaign cash, that comes with very specific voting instructions. Deals are made for voting "correctly" and there are "after office" job opportunities included, so that even not getting re-elected, for casting "unpopular" votes, can become a good carreer move (see Newt Gingrich as an example). Getting something done in congress requires control of only a few key positions, mostly committee chairmanships. These positions effectively control what, if anything, makes it to the floor for a vote. Note that Obama ALWAYS claimed that the "Bush" tax cuts were the driving factor for the economic mess, yet did not ever change them, even with TOTAL demorat control of congress that could ram through the massive, and unpopular PPACA bill. Hmm...
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 07-03-12 at 12:23 PM.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  5. #15
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    There is no doubt in my mind that the Republican Party will instantly change its tune about a number of things, the minute there is a Republican president. Foremost among them are economic stimulus and deficit spending. The historical track record of Republicans supporting contractionary fiscal policies when THEY are the ones in power is...not very good, to say the least.
    Very well, what are you willing to wager on this?

  6. #16
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Very well, what are you willing to wager on this?
    I'm not sure how a wager would work, because as I said, Republicans could always find some lovely euphemism for "stimulus," and/or create some rationale as to why their stimulus was different than Obama's. Such a situation would allow an easy "out," as the party taking the negative side of the bet could always claim it wasn't really a stimulus.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 07-04-12 at 09:55 AM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #17
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    15,269

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    He has about the same amount of influence as he does over gas prices.

    Interesting to note the "I Hate Obama" crowd isn't voting here.
    Does that mean that Bush isnt responsible for causing the 'Great Bush Recession?'

  8. #18
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:46 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,407

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I'm not sure how a wager would work, because as I said, Republicans could always find some lovely euphemism for "stimulus," and/or create some rationale as to why their stimulus was different than Obama's. Such a situation would allow an easy "out," as the party taking the negative side of the bet could always claim it wasn't really a stimulus.
    You mean like how Obama just granted a limited form of immigration amnesty without using the word amnesty?
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  9. #19
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    You mean like how Obama just granted a limited form of immigration amnesty without using the word amnesty?
    Yep. Relevance?
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #20
    Educator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    11-10-12 @ 04:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    801

    Re: What level of influence does a Chief Executive have over the economy?

    It really depends. When Bush was President, he did a lot to direct the agenda when he had control of congress. When Pelosi/Reid took control of congress, we saw a great deal of deference and trying to work across the aisle. Unfortunately, the results were not good.

    Obama as President has taken a far more powerful approach with the economy. He chooses laws to disregard, has blocked some energy development, and specifically sought other forms of energy production through stimulus. In fact, just as No Child Left Behind and the Bush tax cuts were specific policies that Bush worked for, Obama has specifically fought for and gotten trillions of dollars in ineffective stimulus debt, cash for clunkers, auto industry takeover, Obamacare taxes, and other policies that damage the economy.

    At the same time, he has been unclear on tax policy, refused to work across the aisle, and kept the economy in limbo about future law changes. A lot of this is Congress' fault, but it is also Obama's fault in many ways. He, while campaigning against a "do nothing congress", threatened to veto the student interest rate extension if it wasn't written exactly the way he wanted it.

    So the President can certainly affect the economy depending on how much power they usurp or neglect. I don't think anyone can argue that Obama has maintained a constitutional separation of duties or limit on executive power. At the same time, he has forgone addressing some of our worst economic issues in favor of his stimulus union payoffs and Obamacare taxes.
    Get informed: UNICEF foreign adoption policy is killing orphans and the US gives $132 million to UNICEF every year. Stop the madness.
    For the best news and commentary on the 2012 election from the GOP perspective, visit www.whitehouse12.com.

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •