The dramatization of the financial situation by George Bush, Barack Obama, and John McCain is just as paradoxical as the fact that Americans are not giving in to the panic. Without underestimating the seriousness of the situation, they believe that the state of the economy is bad: 55% believe this, but on September 14, the eve of the crisis, only 40% believed this (Gallup).
However, Americans are remaining calm: two thirds of them feel “concerned, but not alarmed” by the situation. As to the future, confidence in the country’s economy is the same: 66% of inhabitants believe that the economy is not “affected” by the current Wall Street crisis (CNN). Other indicators agree. Also, Americans anticipate an increase in the Stock Market and real estate prices (Opinion Dynamics). Because, in spite of these issues, America fundamentally believes in its capitalism.
American citizens believe, however, that it needs more regulations from now on, and that the lack of control over financial institutions led to the crisis. According to a poll in the Los Angeles Times, 62% share this opinion. Around two-thirds of citizens support the governmentÂ’s plan to save Wall Street and financial institutions, no matter what their partisan beliefs might be (Pew Research Center or CNN surveys).
Sacred Union on a Delicate Subject
But approval of the governmentÂ’s plan does not mean supporting George Bush. An increasing majority (76%, according to CBS-NYT) believes that the American president is managing the economy poorly. The Secretary of the TreasuryÂ’s plan is not enough to restore his image.
In reality, the economic question is becoming a political issue that extends beyond the narrow limits of the presidential campaign; it brings the entire political system into play. The decisions to come concern both legislative and executive power. The President of the United States elected on November 4 will inherit the application of the anti-crisis plan.
If Bush aims at national unity, it is because he needs the Democrats’ votes in Congress to adopt Henry Paulson’s plan to save the financial institutions. McCain, by interrupting his campaign, looks to dramatize the situation. He is positioning himself in a state of “war” against the crisis. Obama wants to adhere to the times by defending regulations. But to be in agreement with his doctrine, he must give the President the Democrats’ votes in Congress. On the eve of elections to the House of Representatives and the Senate, it is a risky bet. In these conditions, the three actors understand that their interest lies in maintaining a sacred union on this delicate subject.
Standing with Bush is a Trap
“Structurally,” as American surveys say, opinion is leaning in favor of the Democrats’ ideas, in the sense that the current crisis reinforces the idea of the need for regulation. But “practically,” American citizens refuse to pay for the plan with their taxes, across party lines. In this sense, they remain attached to the “tax cut,” leaning towards Republicans.
For Sen. Obama, who currently has a lead in the polls thanks to the news media's focus on the economy and appears in the same photo as Bush to sign the Wall Street savings plan, this would be in the nationÂ’s interest, but it is not necessarily a winning battle. This even looks like a trap. In the last Gallup survey, which follows the campaign daily, McCain was, for the first time since the beginning of the crisis, tied with his opponent.
History has never witnessed a leader quite like Donald Trump — a mix of ignorance, arrogance immorality, brazenness, insensitivity and sheer stupidity.
A summit that would normally send a reassuring message ... faces total uncertainty thanks to the weakness of the United States. The only person to blame for this is Trump.
The Beijing summit did not produce a major agreement between the great powers on the region, but it firmly established that Middle Eastern crises are now deeply tied to the great-power dialogue.
History has never witnessed a leader quite like Donald Trump — a mix of ignorance, arrogance immorality, brazenness, insensitivity and sheer stupidity.
The challenge for Washington is no longer whether it possesses sufficient capabilities, but whether the political system can align those capabilities behind a coherent long-term priority.
The Beijing summit did not produce a major agreement between the great powers on the region, but it firmly established that Middle Eastern crises are now deeply tied to the great-power dialogue.
European autonomy - military, technological, economic, and financial - is beginning to take shape as Europe hedges against current and future fluctuations in [U.S.] policy.