The Obama campaign says Americans are “absolutely” better off than they were four years ago. Who are they asking? Not the tens of millions who lost their jobs and homes since 2008.
Absolutely Better Off
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
7 Comments. Leave new
Absolutely, I’m better off in 2012 with the 1st COLA to my Social Security check in two years! đ
But isn’t the question unfair?
I notice a similar unfairness between credit in politics and credit in religion. When someone’s cancer goes into spontaneous remission, it’s the loving hand of Jesus answering the prayers of the person who has come through the fire to walk in brotherhood and peace with their personal savior for ever and ever.
When the cancer fails to respond to treatment, and kills someone in their late 40s or 50s, but only after a long, drawn-out, pain-filled ending that took months of ever-increasing indignities to get to, well, the Lord heard those prayers too, and ended that person’s suffering. (Praise Jesus, and don’t forget to make that check out to your local church.)
It’s easy to be miraculous when you don’t get docked for the screw ups. Similarly, if Obama creates jobs, that’s to his credit. Doesn’t matter that the jobs are a fraction of the pay of the jobs they replaced, it doesn’t matter that it leaves millions in a situation of indentured servitude in which they’ll be toiling for the rest of their lives with virtually no hope of retirement, an ObamaJob (TM) is fungible with any union job with full benefits and protections from arbitrary dismissal.
I’ve said it before: leaders demonstrate that they deserve to be in charge by getting things done, not by telling us that they couldn’t because they couldn’t rally support. Obama had more support than any incoming president I can think of (except maybe FDR). He pissed it away.
Am I better off than I was four years ago? No. And that’s the simplest metric I can think of for how to vote. If I’m worse off (assuming I didn’t become worse off because I started smoking crack or something), than the system isn’t running correctly. If I ran a company and one of the divisions wasn’t running correctly, and the guy in charge had four years to turn things around, and didn’t (Whim, I’m gonna cut you off right here: the jobs report tells it all. There are fewer jobs, and they’re worse. I’d be happy with a 10% unemployment rate if the new jobs were equivalent to the jobs-now-gone, but someone with a mortgage isn’t going to cover it with a fast-food position because that’s all they can get after 15 years at their former company.)
I would have even excepted something that showed an understanding of the problems. I understand that you can’t stop a runaway locomotive on a dime. But the bankers were never perp-walked, Bradley Manning still hasn’t had a trial (and no one will tell me why it’s taking so long), those Gitmo prisoners are never going to get trials (and that’s called a gulag, everyone, and it belongs in Communist Russia), the banks keep getting all the benefits and all the help, union jobs are drying up like semen on a blue dress, and the 1% keeps going to the (off-shore) bank while the infrastructure crumbles and the planet melts.
Sorry, Mr. Obama. I know you came onboard with a lot of ambitious ideas, but your division simply isn’t demonstrating core competencies. I’m afraid we’re going to have to let you go. Here’s your multimillion dollar golden parachute with free Secret Service protection, health care for life (the good kind, Cheney-level stuff, not what those morons who elected you get), and so forth. We wish you luck placing your skills elsewhere.
The measure of re-electability is NOT based on whether people are better off than four years ago, but on whether they perceive things as getting better during the election year.
And most people have gone from dread that their own job was about to self-destruct as Obama took office with more than 800,000 jobs disappearing every month, to the current state where the 80% still employed feel little fear and quite a bit of relief.
Obama has not done nearly enough to convince anyone other than the minority of Obamabots that’s he’s been trying his best, but fear of what R&R will do gives Obama the edge, with the punters giving him a 3:10 odds on chance of victory. (For those who don’t follow racing, usually it’s 10:3, meaning you win $10 if you bet $3; 3:10 odds on means you have to bet $10 to win $3.)
The US remains a two-party system, and the alternative party is promising to eliminate taxes on the 0.1% paid for by eliminating unemployment insurance payments (premiums will continue) and Medicaid for starters, and probably national parks and Social Security if they can get away with it.
I’m getting really tired of hearing this “better off” crap. Yes, many lost jobs, homes and lives. That was well underway when Obama stepped in – thanks to 8 years of Generelisimo Busho. How short is your memory Ted?
Obama didn’t get everything done. Has any president, EVER, in the history of America gotten everything done? Romney thinks we lived in Mayberry before the Obama took office. Where was your fantasy world?
I get that cartoonists and comedians such as John Stewart tend to play both sides but I don’t believe that has anything to do with true bi-partisan leanings; it is, and always has been, about reaching the broadest population base possible in order to make more money.
When one is attempting to reach as many people as possible one must accept that one can be a force for change.
The “better off” topic is valid but this comic is not. It takes standpoint that facts are to be denied unless they are convenient in attacking an opponent.
So it would seem, Ted, that this is an attack on Obama. That’s fine because you do also attack Romney. It’s not fine because your attacks on Romney are, generally much more rooted in balanced facts than those on Obama.
If ever there was a time to take a stand and do the right thing, this is it. Lame vague cop-out comics like this really disappoint me because I believe you, Ted, have much more intelligence and potential than this reflects.
America can go 2 ways. Think which way is best for American and the planet. It should be obvious by now that I support Obama. Why? Because he is, and has been, turning things around (too slowly for some – most of whom haven’t the foggiest notion what is involved). Women’s rights, equal voting rights, better health care (Do some research on how long it took Canada to kick your ass in health care; it wasn’t a puny 4 years!)… and on and on and on.
Dude, the whole f#2king world is better off with Obama than Romney and only a completely ignorant moron could think otherwise.
I’m Canadian and I’m taking a stand. You, Ted, Mr. Revolution, might want put you feet where your mouth has been. Which ever side you take, be an American and take a side and be a force for change instead of a cartoonist who used to be hard edged, but now mostly whines a lot.
This may give you some help:
http://3chicspolitico.com/president-obamas-accomplishments/
Actually, I know a ton of people who have lost their job since the meltdowns started, and yet understand that we are unquestionably better off as a country since Obama took office and are planning to vote accordingly.
There’s a word for people selfish enough to vote based solely on what affects them, rather than what’s good for the country as a whole- it’s “Republican”.
@Alex
Allow me to respond with Chris Rock: “If you vote against Obama because he can’t get stuff done, it’s kind of like saying, “this guy can’t cure cancer. I’m gonna vote for cancer.””. Bout sums it up.
Look, I’m not going to rehash this argument with you- we both agree your plan would be a complete and utter disaster for the US (sort of like wrecking your car because the mechanic isn’t fixing it fast enough to suit you. Only in your version, your rich uncle dies and leaves you a new car, and in mine you lose your job because you were dumb enough to wreck your car and now can’t get to work). What you don’t get is that the Republicans WANT disaster; they are pushing us TOWARDS disaster so they can finish breaking this country into little pieces. And what they build from those pieces will make you long for the days of Obama and the Democrats being in charge, I promise.
In the end, more people are going to agree with me and Chris Rock then you, which is why in November, you’ll be writing a check to the EFF. (Oh, and for the record: A) Its taking so long because Bradley Manning forfeited his right to a speedy trial the second he joined the army B) Obama tried to have the Gitmo people tried in criminal courts and was blocked from and crucified for doing so and C) Claiming that the banks are getting “ALL” the benefits is the level of ODS fueled, fact-free bs that I expect from Ted, not you.)
@j.von
Right on! Preach it, brother. Just some minor corrections and emphasis:
“The âbetter offâ topic is valid but this comic is not. It takes standpoint that facts are to be denied unless they are convenient in attacking an opponent.”
Ted’s been doing that a LOT lately- if he can bash Obama, the actual facts (even after they’ve been pointed out) no longer appear to matter to him. Sad, really.
“So it would seem, Ted, that this is an attack on Obama. Thatâs fine because you do also attack Romney. Itâs not fine because your attacks on Romney are, generally much more rooted in balanced facts than those on Obama.”
I would also argue that the number of attacks is seriously unbalanced- Obama attacks outnumber Romney attacks by (roughly estimated) 3 to 1, when Romney and the Republicans are 100X the threat to this country.
“America can go 2 ways. Think which way is best for American and the planet. It should be obvious by now that I support Obama. Why? Because he is, and has been, turning things around (too slowly for some â most of whom havenât the foggiest notion what is involved). Womenâs rights, equal voting rights, better health care (Do some research on how long it took Canada to kick your ass in health care; it wasnât a puny 4 years!)⌠and on and on and on.
Dude, the whole f#2king world is better off with Obama than Romney and only a completely ignorant moron could think otherwise.”
Quoted for general truth, though I’d replace ‘completely ignorant moron’ with ‘someone with an agenda”
Some people are better off, some not. What is needed here is precision – who is better off (the point, as I see it, of Ted’s cartoon) and who not – and quantification – how many are better off and how many not. Then, of course, one has to make a determination of who is going to be better off and who not in four years, should Willlard Mitt make it into office. I’d say it’s FUBAR, no matter who gets to sign off on the real-time first-person shooter games after 20 January next year….
Henri
It’s a great cartoon; and true. Good on Ted for not feeling the need to be “fair and balanced” when criticizing Obama & Co.
Sure, Romney is worse. Ted has never said otherwise. That does not change the fact that Obama sucks massive booty.
As long as Americans keep buying into this “sure X is not perfect, but Y is worse” argument, we will see no change. And change is what we need, as Ted and many others of us know, and as Obama promised.