Terry McAuliffe reiterates the Clinton camp’s pushback against economists, who pretty much universally disparage the wisdom of her gas tax holiday:
New Ipsos poll has HRC up over Obama 47% to 40% nationally. Both beat McCain.
What is Hillary talking about? She’s going to break up the OPEC oil cartel? Because we have such a strong hand to play now with the OPEC member states? And isn’t the main issue here a matter of rising demand, principally for rapidly expanding economies in Asia, not monopoly pricing?
Hillary is certainly not the first candidate to bash the oil producing states or oil companies around election time. And the polls seem to show it’s working for her. But I’m concerned about the widening gap between reality and her campaign trail statements. First with the pledge to obliterate Iran if they attack Israel, then the rebellion against economists and now this.
Where are we going here?
Dana Milbank, on the extended twilight of the Bush Presidency.
Top Hillary surrogate Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) was on MSNBC this morning defending her gas tax holiday: “Thank God that we don’t have economists making necessarily public policy . . .”
Late Update: Sen. Menendez has issued a clarification of his remarks.
Looks like Bush Administration plans to time the Gitmo trials for maximum 2008 Election Day impact have gone awry.
TPM Reader YF finds this whole gas tax debate unsettling:
I have to say that I am really very surprised by the oddly rational, and near universal, condemnation of Hillary’s gas tax plan by the mainstream media. It’s been a long time since the TV talking heads were so focused on reality and for just a moment I actually got my hopes up that they might begin working their seriously atrophied logic and reason muscles and apply this new rigor to, say, the situation in Iraq. Ok- I won’t hold my breath . . .
And how pathetic is the Clinton campaign that they cannot come up with the name of just one freakin’ economist to throw back at the talking heads when they ask their favorite question of the moment “Just name one economist that agrees with the gas tax holiday.” You can’t find some hack Econ prof at East Jesus State University that will go on the record in favor? Are you kidding me? And this is the “grown up” campaign that is ready to roll on “day one”? I wouldn’t hire these people to wash my car.
Also- please note that no one on television seems to be mentioning that the gas tax plan is also favored by a little known individual by the name of John McCain. You’d think, watching the teevee, that Hillary is the only person favoring this notion . . . .
Late Update: TPM Reader GP takes it one step farther:
Something else that nobody on television seems to be mentioning is that Hillary’s plan WON’T CHANGE the price of gas. This is a key point. Now, I don’t want to totally pile onto the media because at least they are somewhat challenging her on this which is more than I expect, but when they keep asking “Can you name one economist that supports your plan?”, the Clinton campaign keeps firing back with “I don’t care about economists, I care about the people and this will save them money, which might not seem like a big deal to you…”, etc, etc.
The media is allowing the Clinton campaign to frame the narrative as “Clinton’s proposal will save the common man money, and that’s all that matters.”
But it WON’T save them money. That’s the point people should be making. It’s not just that economists think it’s an overall bad plan. They are saying that it won’t even do what you say it’s going to do!
If her plan was simply a matter of “saving the common man money” at the expense “ignoring long-term advice from economists”, she might even have a point. It might actually be a GOOD idea to help the average American save a few cents even if overall the plan isn’t a great idea.
But her plan won’t do what she says it will. It won’t save the average American money. At all.
Why doesn’t the media say THAT?
Return with us now to the thrilling days of yesteryear, when a Clinton running for President not only thought economists mattered but touted their support for his economic plan in this TV ad:
According to Zogby, Obama is expanding his lead (51%-37%) in North Carolina and may even be jumping ahead in Indiana. His number for today in Indiana is Obama leading 45%-43%. But he says that Monday night’s single total actually had him beating Clinton 47%-41%, which would suggest possible late movement into an actual lead. But he’s really still an outlier, even though a couple late polls yesterday had only a five point margin for Hillary. (SurveyUSA had a 12 point margin for Hillary.)
If Zogby has this one nailed there will be lots of crowing. But given his record this year I’ll believe it when I see it.
I fondly remember my own personal Zogby epiphany moment. I don’t recall who my interlocutor was. But I told this person that the thing with Zogby was that he relatively frequently nailed final totals right on the nose, even if pretty frequently his numbers were way off. To which my friend very wisely responded, “Josh, that means he sucks.” And I thought, “Hmmm, I guess that’s right.”