Showdown on Ukraine

April 14, 2024

Pity poor Mike Johnson.

As the House Speaker weighs somehow bringing the momentous question of aid for Ukraine to the House floor this week, he faces a dagger if he does and a club if he doesn’t.

To his credit, Johnson is taking his leadership position – not just of the House but more generally of the federal government – with a deep sense of responsibility.  As such, he seems to have accepted that it’s imperative to U.S. interests to resolve the Ukraine question.

If he does, he’s sure to be pilloried by the hard-right element that has made life miserable for him and his predecessor and has brought Congress to a near standstill.

If he doesn’t, he will be subject not just to broader criticism but the embarrassment of an insurgency from an entirely different direction.  Common-sense, centrist legislators will attempt to shove aside Johnson to bring Ukraine to the House floor on their own.

As such, the matter at hand is not only vital to the war in Ukraine but could come to symbolize the brewing battle in this country over whether government, and ultimately the populace in general, should be guided along by the middle majority or by the extremes.

Any provision of funds to Ukraine is stridently opposed by far-right members of the House such as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.  The Georgia Republican’s motion to vacate the Speakership– the same tool used to oust prior Speaker Kevin McCarthy – is the dagger that Johnson faces.

“Funding Ukraine is probably one of the most egregious things that he can do,” Greene told CNN last week.

On the other hand, if Johnson doesn’t move forward in some satisfactory fashion, members of the centrist Problem Solvers Caucus are threatening to employ a rarely used device called a discharge petition to bring their own measure to the floor.

This is the club hanging over Johnson, though it’s one the sponsors would clearly prefer not to swing into action.  As much as anything, they’re trying to use the threat of such to keep Johnson from caving to the extremists.

“It’s a countervailing pressure to the pressure from the other side,” Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick told a No Labels session last week.  Fitzpatrick, R-PA, is co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus, which is made up of equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats.

Fitzpatrick and his co-leader on this particular effort, Jared Golden, D-ME, maintained that they want to give the Speaker the opportunity to move forward on his terms.  But if that doesn’t work, they said, there will be “no holds barred” on the discharge petition.

Fitzpatrick said he for one is in the dark as to what the Speaker will propose and how he plans to get the votes just to get it to the House floor.  Johnson hasn’t been forthcoming on how he intends to proceed, with conflicting pressures coming from every direction.

Most but not all Democrats want the House to vote exactly as is on the $95 billion Senate bill that combines aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan with humanitarian assistance for Gaza. While some have opposed unfettered military aid to Israel, pressure ratcheted up this weekend in response to the missile and drone attack by Iran.

Republicans, meanwhile, have been floating a variety of alternatives to direct aid.  One is to revive the Lend-Lease program from World War II.  Another is to pay for some of the aid by selling off Russian sovereign assets that have been frozen.

The biggest variable, however, is whether Johnson will attempt to marry the aid package to securing the southern border.  That’s a bottom-line requirement for the extremist right, although unfortunately it’s also the provision that caused them to scuttle the entire package in the last go-round.

Johnson acknowledged the challenges at a news conference on Wednesday, according to The New York Times, saying he was sifting through “a lot of different ideas” raised by his colleagues for aiding Ukraine.

“It’s a very complicated matter, and a very complicated time,” the Times reported him saying, “And the clock is ticking on it and everyone here feels the urgency of that.  But what’s required is that you reach consensus on it.”

The sentiment is laudable.  In reality, however, it’s not going to happen if hardliners are allowed to call the shots.  It is only achievable if Johnson seeks to find consensus among the reasonable-minded majority of the House. This will require House Republicans working with House Democrats, and vice versa, even to the extent of Democrats voting to protect Johnson’s position if they see him doing the right thing.

Cooperation of that sort will be required if we are to help Ukraine.  It’s also what’s best for America.

Which Campaign Issues Resonate Most?

March 10, 2024

We the voting public have conflicting ideas of what this election season should be about.

Trump supporters have a very clear idea it’s about border security and the economy.

Biden supporters see it first and foremost about the threat to our democracy. After that comes a mixed bag of other priorities, led by health care and climate change.

The question on the table is which of these views is more in touch with the concerns of most Americans.

A variety of indicators emerge from nationwide polling conducted for Our Common Purpose by Survey USA in mid-February. The survey began by asking nearly 2,000 likely voters which candidate they will support, delved into the importance of 10 familiar issues, and concluded with a deep dive into what’s behind the lingering preoccupation with the economy. More to come on the latter question at a future date.

Trump led Biden in this poll by the margin of 45%-to-39%, with 10% favoring another candidate and 6% undecided. Trump’s lead is fairly consistent with what other polls are showing.  The Our Common Purpose results indicate, however, that slightly more than 30% of these voters are wavering in one fashion or another. Fitness for office will surely factor into their final choice, but the issues of the day will also weigh heavily.

The 2,000 respondents, who mirror the nationwide voting population, were asked to rate 10 major issues on a scale ranging from not a concern, somewhat important, very important, to critical. The percentages of “critical” ratings is what you’ll be reading about here.

Overall, the economy continues to be the most commonly cited high priority.  This nationwide finding is consistent with the outcome of Our Common Purpose’s survey of the six battleground states in December. The percentage of voters who say each of these issues is “critical”:

1. Economy – 48%
2. Border security – 40%
3. Threat to democracy – 37%
4. Crime – 36%
5. Health care – 30%
6. Budget deficit – 29%
7. Foreign wars – 25%
8. Abortion – 25%
9. Climate change – 21%
10. Public education – 21%

Some of the differences between Trump and Biden supporters are stark. For Trump voters, the top priority is border security. That ranks as the lowest concern for Biden voters. For Biden voters, climate change is the third highest priority. For Trump voters, it ranks lowest.

Here’s what the poll shows are their contrasting lists of priorities:

The importance of issues to Trump supporters

1. Border security – 62%
2. Economy – 58%
3. Crime – 45%
4. Budget deficit – 37%
5. Threat to democracy – 33%
6. Foreign wars – 28%
7. Health care – 23%
8. Public education – 18%
9. Abortion – 16%
10. Climate change – 8%

The contrasting importance of issues to Biden supporters

1. Threat to democracy – 48%
2. Health care – 39%
3. Climate change – 38%
4. Abortion – 36%
5. Economy – 35%
6. Crime – 29%
7. Public education – 25%
8. Budget deficit – 22%
9. Foreign wars – 22%
10. Border security – 19%

Biden highlighted some of the differences in his State of the Union address on Thursday, starting with his statement that “not since President Lincoln and the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault here at home as they are today.”

He claimed that the issue of abortion rights would carry the day. “Those bragging about overturning Roe v. Wade have no clue about the power of women. But they found out when reproductive freedom was on the ballot and we won in 2022, and 2023. And we’ll win again in 2024.”

Perhaps he will be proven right but abortion rights isn’t even the most significant priority of most women. The poll shows 30% of women rate it as critical, lower than they ranked a number of other issues led by the economy at 50%.

Which party has a better handle on the concerns of most Americans? There are several indicators that might encourage Republicans and concern Democrats.

More cohesiveness across the income strata of Trump supporters

Border security and the economy are the issues for Trump supporters, no matter whether they are poor or well-to-do.

Their answers to follow-up questions also show an uncanny consistency regardless of circumstances. No matter whether their annual household income is below $40,000 or above $150,000, nearly equal high percentages say they feel the national economy is doing poorly and their local economy is weak. The closeness of their answers makes it difficult to know whether this reflects their reality or the influence of a strong messaging campaign.

The only difference comes when they are asked if someone in their immediate family is struggling financially. Of those below $40,000, 69% say yes. Of those above $150,000, 32% say yes.

Biden supporters have one parallel in consistency. Those who are firm in supporting him, regardless of their income, rate threat to democracy as the biggest issue.

More cohesiveness among those fully supporting Trump and those leaning to him

The levels of conviction are slightly lower for those who are merely leaning to voting for Trump, but the issues are the same.  The clearcut top priorities are once again border security and the economy.

By comparison, there’s a bit of a disconnect among those who are leaning to Biden. The economy creeps in as being more important to those at lower-income levels, than it is for those of similar income who are fully supporting him.

Far and away, one issue for third-party backers and undecideds

You guessed it. The economy stands out for these voters as well.  All the other issues are clumped together at a significantly lower level of importance.

Other than for Biden’s strongest supporters, like it or not, that’s where most voters are at the moment.

Biden acutely recognizes what he protests is a disconnect between the perception and his actual record.  “The American people are writing the greatest comeback story never told,” he said in his State of the Union address.  “So let’s tell the story here, tell it here and now.”

It remains to be seen how many voters will catch up to the story by November.

Only One Way for Congress to Get Rolling

March 5, 2024

Congress has been forced to resort to a revolutionary concept if it hopes to achieve anything of importance.  It’s called bipartisanship.

The ball got rolling last month in the House of Representatives when members of the centrist Problem Solvers Caucus, made up of equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats, introduced the latest attempt to improve border security and at the same time provide weapons to Ukraine and other allies.

This bipartisan legislation is constructed around a pragmatic quid pro quo, the purpose of which is fully evident.  Neither major provision of the legislation could be enacted on its own.  Put the two together and the chances of passage improve significantly.

Then on Sunday, negotiators emphasized the bipartisan nature of half a dozen bills they were introducing to fund six federal departments for the rest of the fiscal year. The compromise legislation was hammered out by appropriators representing both political parties from both the Senate and House.  Each side got some of its demands and gave up on others.

Our Common Purpose has been contending since last summer (read more here) that with a small bloc of ultra-conservative legislators holding out at every turn, the only possible way for the closely divided House to get anything done is to work across the aisle.  Some number of Democrats must join with Republicans to provide the necessary number of votes.  And the only way for that to happen is to write legislation that is acceptable to both sides.

It surely is what the public wants to see.  Asked in a recent Our Common Purpose survey whether on controversial legislation we should fight it out or work it out, a whopping 93 percent said work it out.

Congress seemed to have adopted that philosophy last summer when President Biden and then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy brokered the bipartisan deal to provide debt-ceiling relief.  But working together lasted for only a heartbeat.  The House quickly reverted to its habitual partisan ways in ham-handing the federal budget for the fiscal year that began on Oct. 1.  The chamber has lurched from one stopgap measure to the next during months of impasse.

In desperation, congressional leaders have suddenly realized all over again that they aren’t going to get anywhere without working across the aisle.  Before celebrating too much, let’s acknowledge the obvious.  Legislative leaders aren’t having some kumbaya moment.  They’re cooperating out of necessity. But that’s something.

The stakes are high.  The only way that aid for Ukraine, or border security, is going to pass is with bipartisan support.  The only way the budget is going to pass is with bipartisan support.

Left to their own devices, a large majority of lawmakers seem amenable.  Once they were given the green light by party leadership, the House approved debt ceiling relief last summer by the resounding majority of 314-to-117.  In line with that, the Wall Street Journal reports that very near the same numbers favor the Ukraine/borders bill.

The rather large hurdle being that legislators need to be given the opportunity to vote on it.  And something is going to have to give for that to happen.

The direct method would be for House Speaker Mike Johnson to swallow hard and bring the measure to the floor.  Even that likely would require that he get enough support from Democrats on preliminary procedural matters to overcome the objections of the House’s ultraconservatives.

The last time that happened, it didn’t end well for the person in charge.  Outraged by then-Speaker McCarthy’s maneuvering on the debt ceiling deal last summer, a tiny minority of ultraconservatives acted out for a week, effectively halting all business in the House.  They subsequently managed to oust McCarthy.

Democrats, who long had been exasperated by McCarthy and didn’t trust his intentions going forward, could have come to his rescue but didn’t.  That doesn’t necessarily mean they wouldn’t jump in to save Johnson.

Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, told The New York Times that if Johnson were to do the right thing and put the matter up for a vote, “there will be a reasonable number of people in the House Democratic Caucus who will take the position that he should not fall as a result.”

Also lurking in the background, although not yet in evidence, is the potential objection of Donald Trump.  His opposition was enough to scuttle the Senate’s attempt to do much the same things.

If Johnson can’t muster the inclination or the gumption to move forward, there’s an alternative.

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R., Pa.) and his fellow sponsors of the Ukraine/borders bill have begun working to file a discharge petition, a rarely used device which allows 218 members of the House to go around the Speaker to bring a measure directly to the floor.

The prospect of such could give cover to Johnson for green-lighting the measure or at minimum pressure him to do so.  Failing that, it remains to be seen whether Fitzpatrick and others would actually buck their own party’s leadership in the interest of achieving what many regard as the greater good.

This is not the first of this kind of opportunity to come up since last summer, and none of those came to pass.  Either Johnson or Fitzpatrick is going to have to stick out his neck if this one is to succeed.  It’s the only way the U.S. will be able to provide more support to Ukraine, and the only way we will tighten up the border.

The House once again stands on the precipice.  It can fall back into the ditch or it can work together to achieve something significant.  Let’s hope it doesn’t blow this.

High Prices Leaving Dark Mark on Families

Feb. 25, 2024

A sizeable number of families across the country are hurting financially – no matter if the experts and certain media observers insist the economy is booming.

“It’s hard times for most folks I know.” – Independent from Middletown, Ohio

“My family is drowning and we aren’t alone.” – Democrat from Black Canyon City, Ariz.

“It’s defeating and incredibly sad to work as hard as we do, get raises, but are struggling. Food costs are almost unbearable.” – Independent from Bishopville, S.C.

The common thread running through these and many more statements, all collected from Our Common Purpose’s just completed nationwide survey on the 2024 presidential election, is the higher cost of living.

Respondents say they are stressed not only by the high cost of food but also housing, utilities, gasoline, all types of insurance. A large number of their comments, which in the past have been referred to here as “Voices of America,” were plaintive. More than a few were desperate. One respondent talked of doing something drastic. Another, unfortunately, was openly suicidal.

The hardship and angst they’re feeling isn’t accepted by the liberal media observers who staunchly believe any negative assessment of the economy is off-base. This is the know-it-alls telling people what they should be thinking rather than going to the trouble of looking into what they are thinking. How, they ask, could anyone reasonably complain with employment so high, the stock market at all-time highs, and inflation supposedly now so under control? They mockingly describe the condition we have not as the recession that was feared but as a “vibe-cession.”

No question, there’s plenty of bad vibes going around. It’s hard to explain away data such as that coming out of the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard that claims 650,000 people are homeless and 42 million households are “cost-burdened” – meaning they pay more than one-third of their income for housing.

Much to the dismay of President Biden, the crisis of high costs might be the best thing going for Donald Trump. A near majority of the respondents to the poll feel they are worse off today than they were three years ago. And of those with that negative outlook, two-thirds say they will vote for Trump.

Overall, the just-completed Our Common Purpose poll shows Trump leading Biden, 47% to 39%, with 10% favoring third-party candidates and 5% undecided. The nationwide canvass of 1,550 voters, conducted by Survey USA Feb. 10-12, has a margin of error of +/- 3.2%.

An important caveat bears mention. Up to one-third of the electorate say they are wavering or undecided. In particular, supporters of third-party candidates might re-evaluate their votes. Based on past experience, Survey USA believes those voters will eventually opt for a candidate who can feasibly become President.  Things could change before November, but for now Trump has a distinct edge.

The comments provided by poll respondents show that in some corners, partisanship is alive and nasty. Some statements are pure GOP animus, occasionally expressed with gutter profanity. In their minds, Biden has never and will never do anything right. Conversely, other respondents acknowledged they are doing just fine financially, in part due to the booming stock market. They gave credit to Biden.

For example, just to highlight the difference, these two responses came in one right after the other:

“I hate it and can’t wait til Biden gets out.” – Independent from Laurel, Miss.

“I don’t think enough has been said of the accomplishments of Pres. Biden.” – Democrat from North Babylon, NY.

Even putting aside those who are eager to assess blame or credit, there’s no getting away from the elephant in the room. A full 92% of voters responding to this poll consider the economy to be a very important or critical issue. Their biggest beef is with inflation – or rather the increased prices that came from inflation.

This angst isn’t exclusively owned by one political party or the other. To the fortunate, high prices are simply aggravating. To those without a financial safety net, the implications are far more serious.

“We don’t have enough money to survive or to pay our bills.” – Republican from South Portland, Maine

“We can’t afford groceries anymore. You have to choose which bills to pay and sometimes you have to choose whether you’re going to pay the bills or buy groceries.” – Independent from Louisa, Ky.

“If prices of rents and food don’t drop, I will have to do something drastically.” – Democrat from Lawrenceville, GA.

Among the hardest hit are the elderly. The cost-of-living increases in Social Security aren’t keeping up with the cost of living.

“Just feels like I can’t afford to live and, being elderly, this scares the hell out of me!” – 73-year-old Democrat from Bakersfield, Calif.

“People on fixed incomes have to choose to eat or pay bills. We get very small COLA in our social security checks, and what little we get is sucked up by Medicare.” – 69-year-old Republican from Uvalda, Ga.

But it’s not just the seniors. Young people are also feeling the pinch.

“Utilities are up $110 from last year. Gas for the car is up. Insurance is up. Food prices way up on needed items. I just can’t keep up any more.” – 19-year-old Republican from New Richmond, Wis.

“Makes getting groceries a tooth-pulling miserably stressful task, knowing you’ll have to blow a ridiculous amount of money for far less groceries than you would even a year ago.” – 20-year-old Democrat from Midland, Mich.

Few if any are buying that this is over.

“Food prices keep rising even though the government says differently.” – Republican from Gipsonburg, Ohio

“I keep hearing inflation has dropped but the $0.49 can of vegetables increased to $0.79 and is now $0.89. That is NOT going down!” – Independent from Merritt Island, Fla.

“Need some de-flation.” – Democrat from Farmingville, N.Y.

To be clear, these laments do not reflect every reply to the survey.  A sizeable number do not offer any further comment. As outlined earlier, a number of others either attack or defend the President’s record. A few mention being laid off and the difficulties of finding work.

But the theme repeated over and over is the damage done by higher prices. The litany of complaints makes clear that many across the country have been and continue to be impacted. While certain media observers might not want to hear it, here’s the bottom line:

“Grocery prices are just way too high. Until those come down, nobody is going to have a good attitude about the economy.” – Democrat from Opelika, Ala.

The consequences, quiet as they might be, are felt every day.  As such, they will bear heavily on the 2024 presidential election.

Inflation Over, Sticker Shock Isn’t

Feb. 11, 2024

Bacon, eggs and toast for breakfast. Meat loaf and potatoes for dinner. Ice cream and chocolate-chip cookies for dessert.

The sticker shock that hits you while filling the grocery cart is real. The cost of these items, along with the rest of Our Common Purpose’s hypothetical weekly shopping list for a household of four, has jumped 28% since 2020.

And that’s best case. It assumes someone in the household is willing and able to prepare those meals every day. The Consumer Price Index doesn’t track most of the processed, and presumably more expensive, foods that have become a greater part of the national diet. Additionally, by the way, it also doesn’t track staples such as peanut butter and jelly nor most vegetables other than romaine lettuce and tomatoes.

That makes for something of an imperfect exercise in gauging the increase in food costs for a household of four, but it’s reassuring that this computation of 28% is snug up against the Washington Post’s independent calculation of 28.5%. In any event, the exercise shines light with whatever precision on what we’re all experiencing.

We know about eggs, which even though the price has come down, still cost $2.50 a dozen today versus $1.48 in 2020. A loaf of white bread has jumped from $1.53 in 2020 to $2.02 today. A bag of chocolate chip cookies has risen from $3.79 to $5.12. Ground beef is up from $3.95 per pound to $5.21. A 12-ounce can of orange juice concentrate has gone from $2.33 to $3.71. A pound of sugar is up from 67 cents to 96 cents. A can of soda has risen from 39 cents to 57 cents.

Overall, Our Common Purpose’s analysis of the Consumer Price Index data shows that grocery prices jumped 7.7% in 2021 and another 19.3% in 2022, before actually dropping 0.8% in 2023.

With that leveling off, the Fed is claiming and prominent media pundits are crowing that inflation has been tamed. But while the Biden administration is doing its best to downplay inflation and more generally the overall economy as being valid issues in the upcoming election, issues they remain.

The economy registered more concern than any other issue in Our Common Purpose’s public opinion survey of the battleground states conducted in December, with 89% of voters calling it either critical or very important. And when respondents were given an open-ended opportunity to say what issues were on their mind, they mentioned inflation more frequently than anything else.

Biden’s problem being that while inflation has cooled, the higher prices it caused have not gone away.  A cart of groceries that cost $100 to purchase in 2019 and 2020 costs $128 today.  It’s the same data but looked at in different ways. One view shows the rate of change. Inflation has slowed down. The other view shows the result. Prices remain high.

All this got started with panic buying due to the pandemic, which then turned into global supply issues. This on top of unpredictable weather and a variety of other problems. There was the widespread outbreak of bird flu that caused the jump in egg and chicken prices. The increased price of sugar is blamed on unusually dry weather that damaged harvests in India and Thailand. The increase in potato chips is said to be caused by an increase in the cost of sunflower oil.

It doesn’t stop. Here on the eve of Valentine’s Day, the price of chocolates is expected to increase due to the price of cocoa futures being driven up by bad weather in West Africa.

And what goes up doesn’t necessarily come down. The Consumer Price Index data is sprinkled lightly with food prices that declined in 2023. Eggs was the big one. Tomatoes, cheddar cheese, strawberries and pork chops came down modestly. But for the most part, what goes up stays up.

Who knows how much of the cost of soda pop is attributable to the can it comes in, but the large increase in soda prices beginning in 2021 was attributed by Reuters to a run-up in the price of aluminum. Aluminum peaked in April 2022 and has since decreased, but the price of soda remains higher than ever.

The chief financial officer of Coca-Cola Co. has been often quoted from the 2nd-quarter earnings call of 2022 for blaming “other costs, including wages, transportation, media and operating expenses are also increasing and adding incremental pressures.”

(“Media” would include, for instance, the $7 million it will take for Coca-Cola to buy a 30-second spot in today’s Super Bowl. According to CBS, that’s up from $4.5 million in 2019. Hard-pressed consumers will find little solace in knowing some portion of their food dollars is funding the football money machine.)

Inflation is frequently attributed to inflation. The circularity of cause and effect seems nonsensical, but there is something to it. For one, higher costs of ingredients inevitably lead to the higher price of the finished product. For another, suppliers raise their prices because they can. With all the other price increases providing air cover, why not join the fun?

Which is what puts us in this jam. Food prices are coming close to qualifying as common purpose. They certainly amount to common concern. Voters clearly expected some greater response from the government than what they got. In France, for comparison, the Macron Administration has attempted to force the big supermarket chains to resist price increases from their suppliers.

The Biden Administration is stuck on what do. Presidential task forces come and go with regularity. What’s the harm of naming another to delve into food prices?  The problem being there is a major downside in seeming to take responsibility for something over which, in our free enterprise system, the federal government has no control.

The administration could, however, gain a little credit by more proactively shining a light on what we’re all experiencing along the grocery aisles. Late in the game as this is, it could authorize the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics to augment the Consumer Price Index to spotlight who is raising prices, and more favorably who is rolling them back.

A little exposure might be just enough disincentive to slow down the serial increasers.  And it would allow Biden to say in a concrete way, “Hey, we’re doing something.”

Pocketbook Issues Keep Arising

Jan. 14, 2024

The big issue in this year’s election is not abortion, even as outraged as many women (and men) are.  It’s not climate change, no matter that it’s getting hotter and hotter.  It’s not the fate of the Gaza Strip.  Strangely enough, it’s not even the security of our own borders, though that concerns many.

All of these problems will surely factor into the outcome but the most recent public opinion survey commissioned by Our Common Purpose indicates the make-or-break issues are much closer to home.

It’s paying the rent, buying gasoline, making ends meet.  It’s the cost of medicine, the cost of health care for those who can find it.  It’s stretching the paycheck or the stipend from Social Security.  It’s about getting by.

The economy ranked as the country’s largest issue in the poll, with 89% either calling it critical or very important.  The poll, conducted for Our Common Purpose by Survey USA during the first week of December, surveyed 880 likely voters in the six key battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The predominance of the economy is entirely consistent with other polls.  Even so, how it stacks up against other major issues of the day still comes as something of a surprise.  Abortion has been so argued about and climate change so worried about, but they take a backseat along with today’s other major policy questions.

The emphasis on the economy has left some commentators sputtering.  Isn’t Wall Street running at all-time highs?   Isn’t the joblessness rate about as low as it can go?  Didn’t the country avoid the hard kerplunk of a recession?

Certain op-ed columnists will go to their death beds wondering how the numbers could be so good and the vibe be so bad.  What they see as unwarranted pessimism has created what they call a “vibe-cession,” which they variously attribute to the lag time it takes for consumers to accept price increases to residual gloom from the pandemic to predictable partisanship.

The situation frustrates the President as well.  Why isn’t he getting more credit for the series of stimulus packages that kept the economy from tanking in the worst days of the pandemic?

From a macro perspective, all of them are right.  The economy is certainly humming along.  But “economy” is a catchall term that can encompass any number of connotations and intended meanings.

When respondents to the Our Common Purpose poll were given an open-ended opportunity to list in their own words what they saw as other important issues, their most frequent response was inflation.  In the words of one, “How we are gonna build the economy back to where a gallon of milk doesn’t cost $4?”

Mentions of inflation were followed in frequency by the cost and availability of health care, then by the generic response of “economy.”  These and the variety of related concerns can be grouped under the familiar heading of “pocketbook issues.”  Together they made up a near majority of the responses.

“Health, jobs, housing,” is the succinct summation of an older white woman, a Republican, from a small town outside of Atlanta.

“Everything that deals with our well-being,” is the way a young Black man, a political independent from Philadelphia, sums it up.

Their more micro perspective is where the op-ed commentators have it all wrong.  Pocketbook issues almost always come front and center in an election, and there are plenty of reasons for it now, as anyone who has been in a grocery store recently will be quick to tell you.

Prices for food, rent, and gas are higher.  Interest rates are higher.  Meanwhile, the stimulus checks and other forms of assistance from the pandemic have long since disappeared.

Of course, those worst hit are the most vulnerable, but it’s not limited to them.  Gallup began tracking the impact of inflation in November 2021.  The number of respondents reporting at least some financial hardship kept rising in a succession of Gallup polls, reaching 61% of all households in May of last year.

That inflation has slowed in recent months is like saying a dangerous storm has passed without recognizing the massive damage it left behind.  Higher prices didn’t suddenly go away.  They’re now permanently affixed to every item on the shelves.

One measure of the stress is that credit card debt has now topped $1 trillion.  The U.S. Government Accountability Office says that stimulus checks and other forms of assistance helped cardholders reduce their debt levels during the pandemic but inflation now has undone all that.  Making matters worse, the interest rate on unpaid balances has ballooned above 20%.

In this age of economic disparity, once again the rising tide is not raising all boats.  Solutions are hard to come by but the media, as well as the President, need to start by acknowledging the pain, rather than denying its existence, and then go on to forthrightly consider the ramifications.

Failing to do so, they risk missing the festering discontent that caught Hillary Clinton, pollsters and media observers by surprise in 2016.  The same could cost Joe Biden the election in 2024.

–Richard Gilman

Making Our Case in USA Today

This appeal to our better angels, co-authored with Will Johnson, CEO of the Harris Poll, was just published by USA Today.

Not us vs. them: How Republicans and Democrats can unite ahead of 2024 (usatoday.com)

On the eve of 2024, here’s wishing you health and happiness in the coming year.  It’s a year that likely will test our core principles as a country.  Let’s resolve to rise above the partisan divide by doing what we can to find ways of working together.

Options to Biden-Trump Look Dim in Poll

Dec. 27, 2023

Those wishing to avoid another smash-up between Joe Biden and Donald Trump had better get their act together in a hurry.  The only outside hope at the moment is Nikki Haley, and it’s a distant one.

Our recent poll shows that the upcoming Republican primaries and a nascent third-party presidential campaign that has nettled Democrats are thus far drawing little more than a yawn in the six key battleground states.  This disinterest will come as a severe disappointment to those who are hoping somehow to avoid a reprise of 2020, or more pointedly are opposed to a second term for the past president or, for others, the current president.

The public opinion surveys done for Our Common Purpose have consistently shown that Americans want better for the country than what we have.  But the latest iteration of the poll, focusing specifically on the 2024 presidential election, shows that our better angels don’t always win out.

Despite all the evidence of damage done by division – witness the dysfunction in Congress – and the good that common sense tells us would come of working together, we persist in hunkering down in our partisan trenches.

The poll, conducted by Survey USA in the first week of December, explored a series of what if scenarios with 880 likely voters.  What happens if it’s again Trump versus Biden?  What happens, given all the attention being paid to the upcoming GOP primaries, if the candidate ends up being someone other than Trump?  What happens if a third-party candidate mounts a real challenge?

The top line shows Trump leading Biden by the razor-thin margin of one percentage point, 44% to 43%, across the aggregate of six battleground states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin).   That’s a tad tighter than other polls have shown but some variation is to be expected with a margin of error of +/- 4%.

More concerning is that with more than 10 months to go before the election, fully 75% of the respondents (38% for Trump and 37% for Biden) say they are locked into their votes.

This even though many acknowledge they have concerns with their own candidate.  While it’s Trump who is embroiled in legal problems, it’s Biden’s supporters who are more inclined to worry about their own guy with 11% admitting to serious concerns and another whopping 53% to some concerns.

They’ll be voting for Biden anyway because their concerns about Trump are even more pronounced.  More than 4 of 10 of respondents say their vote will be determined as much or more by their concerns about the opposition candidate, this is equally the case on both sides of the fence, than by the considerable policy issues faced by the nation.

The striking thing is that despite their concerns they are nonetheless channeling their attention on the Big Two, rather than considering the alternatives.

If 75% are firm for Trump or Biden, that leaves only 25% who at this juncture could be classified as “persuadable.”  They are either wavering in their support of one candidate or the other, aren’t decided, or couldn’t support either one if they were the only two in the race.

Out of deference to the sitting President, Democrats aren’t offering up any alternatives. but what if Ron DeSantis or Nikki Haley were to displace Trump on the GOP side?  The poll shows that in the battleground states, at least at the moment, neither fares as well as Trump.  Both trailed by 8 percentage points in head-to-head matches against Biden.

The only ray of hope is that more voters – in particular independents – say they are as yet undecided about Haley.  In the matchup of Trump versus Biden, 14% of independents say they wouldn’t vote and 11% are undecided.  With Haley versus Biden, those numbers go up to 18% and 20%.

What about adding a third-party candidate to the mix?  The poll shows voters in the battleground states aren’t much interested in that possibility either.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has declared as an independent, draws 12% support in a three-person field with Biden and Trump.  Joe Manchin, who hasn’t declared anything but stands as perhaps the most prominent of the spokesmen for the No Labels initiative that has Democrats screaming spoiler, attracts a mere 5% against Biden and Trump.

Of course, lots can change on the campaign trail or in the courtroom before November.   Other polls show Haley gaining ground in New Hampshire.  With a good showing there, voters in the battleground states likely will pay her more notice.  That’s about the best chance there is for breaking up the Biden-Trump monopoly.

But for the moment anyway, voters in the battleground states appear to prefer seeing the two heavyweights, rampant distrust of Trump in the one corner and misgivings about Biden in the other, duking it out to the finish.  As if this will settle matters.

Yes, there will be a winner, albeit likely a disputed one.  Whoever wins, the animus will go unabated.  We will squander the opportunity for the fresh start the country desperately needs, and instead double down once again on the partisanship that divides us.  Sad to say, a good portion of the responsibility will rest with we the voters.

–Richard Gilman

Moderates Missing the Fire

Nov. 26, 2023

The extreme ends of the political spectrum monopolize the discussion, dominate the media, and give the everlasting impression we are a country divided.

We moderates, who logically should be the bridge-builders spanning the big divide, stand by largely powerless.

That’s not happenstance.  We moderates come up short on leadership, a platform, and on passion. Each of these deficiencies is a topic onto itself, in totality involving much too much information to present or digest all at once.  Let’s limit ourselves here to the question of passion, the least explored of the shortcomings.

Our Common Purpose devoted a good portion of one of its periodic public opinion surveys, this was conducted two years ago by Survey USA, to exploring whether personality differences line up with political differences.  Are conservatives fire-breathing monsters?  Are liberals warm and fuzzy pushovers?  Are moderates milquetoasts?

The answers are to a degree reassuring.  We are pre-conditioned by continuous vitriol and disparagement to expect the worst of those on the other side.  But at least according to how survey respondents see themselves, we surprisingly track together more often than we might think.  In fact, there is no appreciable difference between conservatives, moderates and liberals on 11 of the 27 personality traits that were examined.*  Those of all political affiliations lean more toward:

 Taking charge, rather than following others.
 Getting organized, rather than taking things as they come.
 Adjusting to circumstances, rather than doing as planned.
 Hearing out others, rather than persuading them.
 Smoothing things over, rather than arguing the case.
 Assisting others when needed, rather than figuring it’s on them.

Even where differences emerge, those of varying political ideologies are not – in aggregate – totally opposite of each other.  They all generally trend in the same direction, just to greater or lesser degrees.

So, for instance, each persuasion is more inclined to follow the news than not be interested.  While liberals average +47 and conservatives +26 on the side of following the news, those in the middle come in at just +15.   Moderates follow the news, but on average the interest is lukewarm.

This pattern repeats.  Contrary to what we might expect, the biggest such differences – particularly involving traits that have a more direct bearing on political involvement – are not between conservatives and liberals, but with moderates.  In contrast with those on either side of the political spectrum, those in the middle tend on the margin to be:

 Less interested in politics.
 Less interested in following the news.
 Less likely to speak their mind and, in general, slightly less talkative.
 Slightly more inclined to second-guess themselves.
 More likely to wait to join in until they’re invited, rather than initiating.

Put this together and in aggregate we moderates profile as holding back.  We are not just moderate in ideology.  We practice moderation.  At best this might be characterized as ambivalence.  At worst, aversion.  Only 17% of those in the moderate category regard themselves as heavily engaged with politics. That compares with 33% of the “very conservatives” and 45% of the “very liberals”. **

This finding sheds new light on why those on the extremes get all the attention.  It’s not just that many of them are willing to assert themselves.  They get to shout loudly as they want because there’s pretty much no one else in the arena.  It also helps explain why so much attention is paid to so-called “swing voters.”  We are docile sheep waiting to be enticed in one direction or the other.

For anyone wanting moderates to push their own agenda, these conclusions are not encouraging.  The lower level of involvement could be one of those chicken-and-egg questions.  Does the lack of passion explain the lack of leadership and agenda?  Or does the absence of leadership and agenda give moderates nothing to be passionate about?

Whichever, the absence of a countervailing force in the middle is not good for the country.  We moderates have to find a way to overcome our personalities if we expect to build any bridges.

–Richard Gilman

Notes on methodology:
*Respondents were asked to evaluate where they put themselves on a 201-point scale (-100 to +100) for 27 traits. A particular trait would be shown at one end of the scale and the opposite behavior at the other end. For instance, “In group settings, I speak my mind . . . hold my tongue.”
**Respondents were placed into one of five categories – very conservative, somewhat conservative, moderate, somewhat liberal, very liberal – based on how they placed themselves on the same 201-point scale. They also rated their own engagement in politics. So of those who ended up in the moderate classification, only 17% gave themselves high marks for engagement.