I’m wondering if it’s even possible for a president to create long-term sustainable change when electoral impatience is so prevalent.
What we’re seeing in Massachusetts is an impatience with the economic recovery. Americans are tired of waiting for things to return to the way they were before the recession. And rightfully so. The jobs situation is still a major problem, and the White House needs another major spending bill to help fix this. The Wall Street bastards who caused the recession still haven’t been adequately punished for bringing the world to the brink of disaster. I’m just as worn out with the recession as anyone. Trust me on that. But will my family be better off with another quickie bubble, followed by another deep recession?
A short term quick fix is unstable and unsustainable. Bubble economies rose out of a need for political and financial expedience. A long-term economic plan has never really been allowed to happen because the demand for immediate gratification has repeatedly won the day.
The real irony is that by voting against the president, voters are actually encouraging the creation of short-term bubbles, yes, but they’re also giving some power back to the Republicans whose domination of politics for the last 30 years created trickle-down economic policies, market bubbles and, subsequently, just about everything that’s awful right now.
Is change possible if it’s only allowed a few months before people turn back to more of the same?