Can politicians still be "honest" with people when things aren't good and win?

[sg0508]

I suppose the answer to the question is "yes", but of course, words and phrases must be shaped very, very effectively and carefully to avoid insulting anyone.  So yes, politics will come into play.

I ask this concerning the thread that pondered some of the blunders made by Mitt Romney during the last campaign and particularly, the "47% remark".  As an educated, middle class American, it isn't hard to see that the middle class is in big, big trouble and sometimes, it's almost more relieving to hear someone who is brutally honest than someone who smiles and blows smoke up our behinds.  Throughout the '12 campaign, Romney all but stated three things:

1) The middle class in this country is beyond screwed near and long-term
2) There is nothing that any domestic politician can or will do about it
3) The middle class is squeezed by the top 1% and the bottom 30%.

Of course, Pres. Obama spent a great deal of time talking the middle class up and 1.5 years into his second term, many middle class Americans are finally seeing that that their "middle class card" could expire soon. 

The 47% comment clearly insulted a lot of people, including those on some kind of welfare or gov't help, and it was a smack in the face.  Of course, behind closed doors, we can clearly admit that perhaps he was right and we don't like having the truth thrown in our faces.  That one comment may have cost Romney a very winnable race and on Election Night, it was clearly evident that Americans were sold that Romney didn't care about the middle class and that Obama's policies would help them (even though any educated human being probably realizes the opposite).

So, can politicians still be honest with people, or is it going to continue being a game of playing off of people's stupidity until the end of time?

[hopper]

You know people are too sensitive about the 47% comment he didn't insult people he just made a sloppy comment. I'm low income myself and it didn't insult me but its like why would a Presidential Candidate say something like that? It just seemed sloppy and out of place for a Presidential Candidate to say. Its not like the comment cost Romney the election or a lot of votes though.

Obama is a good campaigner like I said in another thread and he was able to sell his case to people and Romney couldn't. Romney just seemed like he was out of touch with people in terms of empathy and Obama did have that empathy issue in his favor.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

The 47% comment wasn't the only comment that hurt Romney, remember his deportation remark?

[bedstuy]

Being fatalistic is terrible leadership.  If you think the country is screwed and there's nothing that can be done, don't run for political office.  It's the same in any leadership position.  You need to be positive and hopeful to lead people.

America has been in far worse straights than it is now.  What we look to in leaders is their vision towards a course of action that improves people's lives.  If you don't have that you will never change people's minds or create anything positive.  That's not Romney's fault per se, he just represents a morally, spiritually and intellectually bankrupt organization, the GOP.

3) The middle class is squeezed by the top 1% and the bottom 30%.

What are poor people doing to hurt the middle class?

[sg0508]

Being fatalistic is terrible leadership.  If you think the country is screwed and there's nothing that can be done, don't run for political office.  It's the same in any leadership position.  You need to be positive and hopeful to lead people.

America has been in far worse straights than it is now.  What we look to in leaders is their vision towards a course of action that improves people's lives.  If you don't have that you will never change people's minds or create anything positive.  That's not Romney's fault per se, he just represents a morally, spiritually and intellectually bankrupt organization, the GOP.

3) The middle class is squeezed by the top 1% and the bottom 30%.

What are poor people doing to hurt the middle class?

Who do you think is supporting the people in that group, especially when the wealthy push large chunks of their share downward?

[old timey villain]

Jimmy Carter tried that and it backfired horribly

[Bojack Horseman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJClXb8vQpY



I'd say no.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Americans have a long history of rejecting blunt honesty for comfortable lies.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJClXb8vQpY



I'd say no.

"When things aren't good"

[bedstuy]

Being fatalistic is terrible leadership.  If you think the country is screwed and there's nothing that can be done, don't run for political office.  It's the same in any leadership position.  You need to be positive and hopeful to lead people.

America has been in far worse straights than it is now.  What we look to in leaders is their vision towards a course of action that improves people's lives.  If you don't have that you will never change people's minds or create anything positive.  That's not Romney's fault per se, he just represents a morally, spiritually and intellectually bankrupt organization, the GOP.

3) The middle class is squeezed by the top 1% and the bottom 30%.

What are poor people doing to hurt the middle class?

Who do you think is supporting the people in that group, especially when the wealthy push large chunks of their share downward?

How much of anyone's paycheck is going to poor people?  Not a significant amount and probably less than in the 1970s and 1980s.  The middle class has been squeezed by higher healthcare, education and housing costs, along with a weak job market.  It's not poor people taking too much of their money. 

[sg0508]

Being fatalistic is terrible leadership.  If you think the country is screwed and there's nothing that can be done, don't run for political office.  It's the same in any leadership position.  You need to be positive and hopeful to lead people.

America has been in far worse straights than it is now.  What we look to in leaders is their vision towards a course of action that improves people's lives.  If you don't have that you will never change people's minds or create anything positive.  That's not Romney's fault per se, he just represents a morally, spiritually and intellectually bankrupt organization, the GOP.

3) The middle class is squeezed by the top 1% and the bottom 30%.

What are poor people doing to hurt the middle class?

Who do you think is supporting the people in that group, especially when the wealthy push large chunks of their share downward?

How much of anyone's paycheck is going to poor people?  Not a significant amount and probably less than in the 1970s and 1980s.  The middle class has been squeezed by higher healthcare, education and housing costs, along with a weak job market.  It's not poor people taking too much of their money. 

I'm not going to get into a discussion with someone who believes that.  Sorry.

[Mordecai]

It is plainly obvious for all to see from the 2012 election that honesty about one's beliefs does not win presidential elections and that playing off of people's stupidity is still not enough to get you over line (it only gets you 47% of the way there). As a guy with a brain in his head it was refreshing to me to hear Romney name names and drop all pretext of caring about anybody who earns less than $400,000 a year. I only wish he had gone further in his comments, particularly against the women, the blacks, the Hispanics, the gays, and old people, but I'll take what I can get.

Unfortunately, Americans once again voted for B. Hussein Obama's Afro-socialism.

Like FDR before him, Obama has presided over a depression. January 2009, Obama stepped into the Oval Office and 750,000 jobs were gone forever. By March, 5 million jobs had been lost, umemployment had jumped to 8.5% and the Obama Depression had set in. It is clear that from these past five years that Afro-socialism just does not work.

But there is a solution and it is simple. If you have a brain in your head.

1. Cut the top tax brackets for job creators by 20%.
2. Close loopholes (e.g. mortgage interest deduction).
3. Eliminate funding for PBS.
4. Liquidate Big Bird and Jim Lehrer.
5. Eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood.
6. Give Medicare and Social Security to Wall Street.
7. Increase Defense spending (horses and bayonets).
8. Repeal Obamacare.

Done. Balanced budget. No more deficit. Great economy. No more socialism. Middle class is safe forever.

[Sasquatch]

Jimmy Carter tried that and it backfired horribly

+1

Good speech though.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

At the outset of 2013, instead of small tax increases on the very rich and payroll tax holiday, Democratic simplification of tax code. Raise retirement age, close tax loopholes, especially on oil companies. Update social security to 21st century. Privatize a portion of social security, but raise the cap on the rich so that the loss of revenue is made up for. Repeal the employer mandate portion of Obamacare and create IRA and Health savings accounts.

Instead of sequestration and budget shutdowns, plan should of been passed in March 2013. If not Hilary will have to pass it under Dem controlled Congress.

GOP can't go around like under Dubya, and say class warfare. Truth be told is no matter if it is a GOP or Dem version, we are indeed living under Bowles-Simpson economy.

[TJ in Oregon]

I'm not sure politicians can ever be honest with the people and win, let alone when things aren't going well.

[Mister Mets]

Politicians can be honest when their opponents have been in charge. Although being honest about what can't be done is usually going to cost some votes.

[hopper]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJClXb8vQpY



I'd say no.

"When things aren't good"

Um no the economy was pretty good in 1984 with GDP growth at 7%.

[hopper]

I'm not sure politicians can ever be honest with the people and win, let alone when things aren't going well.

Bill Clinton was honest on the economic platform he ran on in 1992. Bush HW ran on "no new or limited tax increases" and said Clinton raised taxes and fees 24 times when he was Governor of Arkansas and Bush HW still lost the election. Clinton said in rebuttal your policies haven't worked to reduce the debt in 12 years and basically that was the election right there I think. The other one was HW Bush looking at his watch in the debate(not sure if this was the same debate) indicating to the American People he didn't want to be at that debate and that's when the American People gave him the hook as POTUS.

[hopper]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJClXb8vQpY



I'd say no.

Mondale was a New Deal Politician running on policies people didn't want anymore or didn't think would work in the 80's.

[hopper]

At the outset of 2013, instead of small tax increases on the very rich and payroll tax holiday, Democratic simplification of tax code. Raise retirement age, close tax loopholes, especially on oil companies. Update social security to 21st century. Privatize a portion of social security, but raise the cap on the rich so that the loss of revenue is made up for. Repeal the employer mandate portion of Obamacare and create IRA and Health savings accounts.

Instead of sequestration and budget shutdowns, plan should of been passed in March 2013. If not Hilary will have to pass it under Dem controlled Congress.

GOP can't go around like under Dubya, and say class warfare. Truth be told is no matter if it is a GOP or Dem version, we are indeed living under Bowles-Simpson economy.

I agreed with mostly everything you said except for the GOP saying class warfare like its useless rhetoric. Why the GOP is saying that is the Dems keep on talking about the 1% or the so-called rich  making most of the money or economic gains and that a milionares tax has to be placed on the 1% or the so-called rich. That's just not gonna happen.

[hopper]

Jimmy Carter tried that and it backfired horribly

No Carter was a sitting duck. All the un decides went to Reagan on Election Night.

[Skill and Chance]

I think in many ways Obama won in 2012 because he was being more honest with the middle class than Romney.  Obama was careful to present a long, hard slog on jobs and not to venture to close to happy days are here again territory.  Romney was promising the sun, moon and stars on the economy if only he were elected.  It was also a stroke of luck that there was just enough economic optimism in late 2012.  Romney would likely have won in either 2011 or 2013.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJClXb8vQpY

(image)
I'd say no.

"When things aren't good"

Um no the economy was pretty good in 1984 with GDP growth at 7%.

That's what I meant. I was correcting the guy who posted the map. Things were good in 1984, so that's not a valid example.

[Skill and Chance]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJClXb8vQpY

(image)
I'd say no.

"When things aren't good"

Um no the economy was pretty good in 1984 with GDP growth at 7%.

That's what I meant. I was correcting the guy who posted the map. Things were good in 1984, so that's not a valid example.

The best example of an incumbent party under-performing the economy in modern times is 2000 hands down.  The best example of an incumbent over-performing the economy is probably 2012.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

That's nice, but not relevant to the question. Was anyone of those candidates honest despite the situation?