Obama on Small-Town Pennsylvania...

[Torie]

He has such insight to say such things. If people voted without hate and fear, we've never elect a Republican.

agreed

Ya, that is what motivates me, hate and fear. Freedom to choose is for anarchists. We need an empowered  martinet up close and personal. LOL.

[J. J.]

And so people end up- they don’t vote on economic issues because they don’t expect anybody’s going to help them. So people end up, you know, voting on issues like guns, and are they going to have the right to bear arms. They vote on issues like gay marriage. And they take refuge in their faith and their community and their families and things they can count on. But they don’t believe they can count on Washington. So I made this statement-- so, here’s what rich.  Senator Clinton says ‘No, I don’t think that people are bitter in Pennsylvania.  You know, I think Barack’s being condescending.’  John McCain says, ‘Oh, how could he say that?  How could he say people are bitter? You know, he’s obviously out of touch with people.’ 

If he doesn't those those things are unimportant, Obama is out of touch.

Words. You put them in Obama's mouth, but they're not there.

I just quoted what he said, they are Obama's words.  People vote on those issues because the are important to those people. 

I frankly wish I had changed my registration so I could vote against him after this.

[Verily]

And so people end up- they don’t vote on economic issues because they don’t expect anybody’s going to help them. So people end up, you know, voting on issues like guns, and are they going to have the right to bear arms. They vote on issues like gay marriage. And they take refuge in their faith and their community and their families and things they can count on. But they don’t believe they can count on Washington. So I made this statement-- so, here’s what rich.  Senator Clinton says ‘No, I don’t think that people are bitter in Pennsylvania.  You know, I think Barack’s being condescending.’  John McCain says, ‘Oh, how could he say that?  How could he say people are bitter? You know, he’s obviously out of touch with people.’ 

If he doesn't those those things are unimportant, Obama is out of touch.

Words. You put them in Obama's mouth, but they're not there.

I just quoted what he said, they are Obama's words.  People vote on those issues because the are important to those people. 

I frankly wish I had changed my registration so I could vote against him after this.

You said he thinks those issues are unimportant. He never said that, nor did he imply it. The statement clearly reads thus:

"People are frustrated about economic issues. They've not seen any solutions from Washington, so they've stopped caring about economics, and now they vote primarily on their other concerns. [Lack of comment on the importance or unimportance of those concerns.] But we want to get people confident in the government's ability to deal with economic issues again."

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That might be a wrong fork taken right there.

[Verily]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That might be a wrong fork taken right there.

Certainly not in a Democratic primary, and we will agree to disagree on the degree to which government should care about the economy.

[Ban my account ffs!]

This was the lead political story on the local news here.  Obama's comments an Hillary's (and McCain's) response. 

Well, this is straight talk, whether or not people are listening will be heard.

Bull, there is no relation with manufacturing jobs and guns and/or faith.  This is a massive non sequitur on the part Obama, at best.  At worst, it is stereotyping based on class and possibly race. 

The economy was largely based on steel production.  In the late 1970's, we stopped making so much out of steel.  The economy, in some of these smaller towns, never shifted, though that was changing even in the late 1980's.

And just how do you suppose the economy "shifts" in these towns?  By lowering taxes and deregulating the economy?  Obviously not.. we tried that and these places, which had been stagnating, went into freefall.

 A piece of gum partially blocked the gusher when the internet came and people could work from more remote locations.

What Obama is saying is that rather than forcing these people to be concerned about other issues and vote based on them due to the government's own failure to address the economy, the government can address the problems that have embittered these people by better preparing rural America for the new, global economy.

Apparently identifying problems and offering solutions is too much for the uptight suburban conservatives on this forum.  Instead let's do it McCain style:  Sit on the porch and let the market "correct" itself while we all enjoy a cheese sandwich and a weak cup of tea and listen to 60 minutes.

But I guess it is a reactionary value to recoil in disgust at the helping hand of a genuine neighbor.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That might be a wrong fork taken right there.

Certainly not in a Democratic primary, and we will agree to disagree on the degree to which government should care about the economy.

Indeed. There is a Golden Mean in all of this. The devil is to discern it with wisdom as to where it lies. Right now, the Dem rhetoric seems about three standard deviations away, but the silver lining is that most of it is rhetorical populist jive per the imperative to pander for Dem votes. In power, most of it will put into the remainder bin.

[J. J.]

And just how do you suppose the economy "shifts" in these towns?  By lowering taxes and deregulating the economy?  Obviously not.. we tried that and these places, which had been stagnating, went into freefall.

They went into free fall when there was never a need for steel.  The deregulation worked, but kids moved away.  Some got retraining and went into technolgical jobs.  Johnstown biggest employer is an expanding healthcare system, and various other, more technical industries.  It changed; it wasn't a steel town anymore.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The economy changed and it didn't change the attitudes or the value system of the people; that is what Obama doesn't understand.  He seems clueless.

[Person Man]

Mr Diamond, one cannot improve the overall standard of living, except by increasing the skills of those who work. So yes, education and good work habits are job one (that is why we need a total revamping of our secondary school system, particularly in non elite zip codes). A more robust poaching of the best and brightest from abroad will be an interim palliative, but not a long term one. The rest is all counterproductive. It over the longer term, will degrade economic well being, not enhance it. The harsh mistress of comparative economic advantage must rule. The alternative is economic failure, and relative penury, vis a vis those who respect the mistress.  Politicians beyond the realm suggested, and mere driftwood in a rapid stream as it were, helpless and useless, except to do damage.

I don't know how developing our own new industries would hurt the economy. This just seems like big business conservativism trying to sound smart, which it doesn't. I mean, sure the opposite worked a long time ago, but that was when we had a strong infrastructure and people could actually afford to buy more stuff. Now more stuff is being sold and no one can buy it. I mean seriously, what good does it do if all this hocus-pocus comparative advantage mistress bull crap do if it doesn't actually help most it? Modern economics has devolved into a pseudo science, much like the legal science of the late 19th century. The persumptions you are talking about just don't work out. Sure. You pretty much you have to respect the mistress in your wet dreams. In fact, I would say that modern economics is right in the fact that you can't ignore what people really want to do across the world, then again, economics has become non-scientific as it gives total faith into unproven hypothesis and rejects any idea that there can be a greater force in nature than osmosis.  Sure. Comparitive advantage can't be ignored, people will subliminally sabatoge anything given to them....but is it best to suppress it, forego economic change until we can finally take advantage of her again?

I mean, can't we make this great, magical circle of choice work FOR us for a change? I mean, the 4 tigers have done it this way and the moral of the story simply is that comparative advantage is only good if you are the one that has the comparitive advanatage of the unit that produces the best welfare for your constituents. It appears that you know how business works, but don't know how to actually do business.  

And just how do you suppose the economy "shifts" in these towns?  By lowering taxes and deregulating the economy?  Obviously not.. we tried that and these places, which had been stagnating, went into freefall.

They went into free fall when there was never a need for steel.  The deregulation worked, but kids moved away.  Some got retraining and went into technolgical jobs.  Johnstown biggest employer is an expanding healthcare system, and various other, more technical industries.  It changed; it wasn't a steel town anymore.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The economy changed and it didn't change the attitudes or the value system of the people; that is what Obama doesn't understand.  He seems clueless.

This is EXACTLY what I am talking about. The small cities of Pennsylvania's comparitive advantage changed from a higher-paying industry to lower-paying industries. My in-laws told me that they once knew of steel workers that made 85,000 a grand. Some of these service jobs you talk about make less than half of that....and those who did so left the area to get technical jobs in the boom towns of the sun belt (where values are slowly changing) The economy has changed, but not for the better. People still have older values because they still have not reaped the benefits of a global economy in the way that people in the Sun Belt or cities have. I mean, there's more jobs and more money, but people aren't seeing more money for themselves, therefore they try to control token issues that they can control. It's pretty simple. You know you are a hack, or at least mildly autistic, when a small statement like this makes you want to make a YouTube about what Obama said or makes you angry/not vote for him.

[Ban my account ffs!]

In chaos, people search for something to control.

A friend of mine had a rough home life, and she developed anorexia as a relief because it was something she could control.

[Torie]

That is quite a mouthful,Mr. Diamond.  Later. And thanks for your reply, in which I glean sort of that you embrace the protectionist incubator approach for nascent industries or something (even though the action on the Fruited Plain is with prolonging the death throws of senescent waning "keep Terry Schiavo alive" industries it seems to me). I appreciate it. It deserves a considered response and will get one. There is more to life, than the voting patterns in precinct 23 in Altoona,  Pennsylvania - a hotbed of the Masons by the way. Well it once was. Cheers.

[Lunar]

I agree with the comments.  AND there is a Republican side to the comments as well: Many white suburban housewives who don't have to worry at all about economic issues are also very inclined to ignore them and start to organize for PETA or NOW.  They don't have anything better to do besides organize on single-issue liberal suburban social politics.  Include Mothers Against Drunk Driving, people against gambling, etcetera in here too.

Watch the Obama, Clinton, and McCain camps spin this into full gear.  This is an issue that Obama's rivals will try and grab hold of and one that Obama's camp will stage a counter-offense based on their remarks (and already has).  I've been impressed with the language coming out of Obama surrogates and Obama himself thus far post-comment.

[J. J.]

This is EXACTLY what I am talking about. The small cities of Pennsylvania's comparitive advantage changed from a higher-paying industry to lower-paying industries. My in-laws told me that they once knew of steel workers that made 85,000 a grand. Some of these service jobs you talk about make less than half of that....and those who did so left the area to get technical jobs in the boom towns of the sun belt (where values are slowly changing) The economy has changed, but not for the better. People still have older values because they still have not reaped the benefits of a global economy in the way that people in the Sun Belt or cities have. I mean, there's more jobs and more money, but people aren't seeing more money for themselves, therefore they try to control token issues that they can control. It's pretty simple. You know you are a hack, or at least mildly autistic, when a small statement like this makes you want to make a YouTube about what Obama said or makes you angry/not vote for him.

These are not "service jobs," but retrained professional or semiprofessional positions.  I just met a guy last week who had been a steel worker until 1982 and is now a school teacher, because of this training.  There was a shift in the economic base.  I know another that is respiratory therapist.  This started in the late 1970's 25-30 years ago.

And again, what does this have to do with gun ownership or religion, both of which were prevailant before and after the economic change.

Is Obama as ignorant as you are on this issue?

[J. J.]

In chaos, people search for something to control.

A friend of mine had a rough home life, and she developed anorexia as a relief because it was something she could control.

The thing here is that the areas were just as religious during the manufacturing period as after.

[Lunar]

Mr Diamond, one cannot improve the overall standard of living, except by increasing the skills of those who work. So yes, education and good work habits are job one (that is why we need a total revamping of our secondary school system, particularly in non elite zip codes). A more robust poaching of the best and brightest from abroad will be an interim palliative, but not a long term one. The rest is all counterproductive. It over the longer term, will degrade economic well being, not enhance it. The harsh mistress of comparative economic advantage must rule. The alternative is economic failure, and relative penury, vis a vis those who respect the mistress.  Politicians beyond the realm suggested, and mere driftwood in a rapid stream as it were, helpless and useless, except to do damage.

This is completely correct  except that comparative advantage isn't as harsh as you depict it except when it's too rapid for workers to be able to retrain themselves into fields that America's actually good at (superconductors, aircraft, chemicals top the list).

People can't seem to get over the fact that modernizing our economy inevitably yields winners (Texas) and losers (Rustbelt).  There are more winners than losers and she's only a harsh mistress if you have a family of three supported on an overpaid unionized steelworker in Pennsylvania.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Btw, I agree with you about the media's general attitude.  Personally, I don't know whether we know enough yet to where we can conclude one way or other that Obama's attitude includes "contempt".  Certainly not from this statement.

I felt like being charitable for once

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And, of course, some people find a certain sort of pity even more offensive than outright contempt.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I actually think what Obama is saying is painting an accurate picture. That's my thoughts on the matter. Call me what you wish.

Of course you, and most other people here, think that. But that's only because it happens to fit in with your prejudices.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Full text:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Note that at no point does Obama mention what he would do to improve the economy of post-industrial areas. 'tis a pity that most politicians have no sense of irony.

(his basic analysis of the situation is as wrong as in his earlier comments, but that's a given).

[J. J.]

Lead story MSNBC. 

The words "stereotyping" and "elitist" are being used.

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

Sounds pretty accurate for a lot of places and people in the Midwest. Perhaps it's rather sweeping, but it's largely true. People won't like to hear it, though.

^^^^^^^

Agreed, but still a dumb move on Obama's part.   He won't win Ohio, PA, or MI.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

People can't seem to get over the fact that modernizing our economy inevitably yields winners (Texas) and losers (Rustbelt).  There are more winners than losers and she's only a harsh mistress if you have a family of three supported on an overpaid unionized steelworker in Pennsylvania.

Correction:

Winners (China, WalMart), losers (Middle Class America).

[Alcon]

Al, would you elaborate on the inaccuracies of the comment for us pathetic suburbanites?

The first thing when I woke up today was an email from a friend in northwestern PA (who works in a factory) reading "Obama nails Erie."  I'm very much confused who to believe .  Viewed in the context of voting patterns (the only instance in which the "anti-trade" part makes sense) it all seems accurate to me.  But I do want to hear your thoughts on this.

[Democratic Hawk]

Just as those who continue to fan the flames of the Wright controversy are determined to reignite the wars of race that have divided America, those who seek to make political capital on Obama's small-town comments seek to perpetuate the divide along wedge cultural issues

Furthermore, I fail to see how Obama, who obviously is concerned by the economic blight that has scarred much of small-town America, is being particularly elitist, or out of touch, at all

Obama has a very uphill ahead of him; given the readiness of Americans to embrace fear over hope; decline over revival; a failing status quo over change; and so on

Dave

[J. J.]

Al, would you elaborate on the inaccuracies of the comment for us pathetic suburbanites?

The first thing when I woke up today was an email from a friend in northwestern PA (who works in a factory) reading "Obama nails Erie."  I'm very much confused who to believe .  Viewed in the context of voting patterns (the only instance in which the "anti-trade" part makes sense) it all seems accurate to me.  But I do want to hear your thoughts on this.

I'm not certain who you are addressing.

One major one in the link between religion, guns and the economic shift 25-30 years ago.   Well prior to that, there was the same religion and gun trends (I'd actually say the area is less religious than my current area, in terms of church attendance). 

A very good example is me.  I graduated from HS in one of those small towns 28 years ago.  While in High School I was in "Shotgunners Club," where students shot skeet.  Yes, we shot skeet out behind the school.

[JohnCA246]

Alright, I'll have a take on it that almost no Democrats have taken that I've seen.  I don't think Obama's words are very offensive, but they were wrong!

He's making it sound like all gun owners are poor, and they only buy guns and go to church because they are mad.  I'm a huge Democrat, but liberals really need to wake up and realize that people who vote on social issues aren't doing so because they being "duped."  People don't always just vote their pocket-books, and I'm really getting tired of What's the Matter with Kansas patronizing mentality.  Should all art teachers vote for Huckabee, because of his promises on art education would be in their economic interests?  Should all of the Bay Area businessmen vote for Republicans so they can get a tax-break, and forget the environment because it's in their economic interest?  Millions of people vote on social/moral issues because they think it is the right way to do.  Democrats will never get anywhere by continually saying "WHATS WRONG WITH THEM." 

Now since I am liberal I will argue all day that it IS in working and middle class folks' economic interest to vote Democrat, but if they chose to vote on abortion, I'm not going write about what's wrong with them.