In the late 1990s, Republican revolutionaries seemed to bring instability,
and the American voter softened on Clinton. Then terrorism threatened the
equilibrium and he helped re-elect Bush. Then, post-Iraq and post-Katrina,
administrative incompetence led him a bit the other way.

Now disorder has come from an unexpected direction - not from foreign
enemies or domestic zealotry but from a society-wide contagion of financial
risk-taking. Government programs like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac seduced
people into homes they could not afford. Private bankers took on too much
risk with too little capital. Consumers racked up an enormous personal debt.
The effects threaten everything that was achieved, foreclosures are looming
every where. Taxpayer's have been asked to bail-out Wall Street's losses as
the Capitalist government has to take the step of Socialist and buyout stake
in the 'Free Private Sector'  to the tune of 2 Trillion American Dollars
(this is including additional money pumped after the 1st bailout) and he may
have to brace for recession.

Those who have en massed huge wealth are probably less than 10% of the
population.  They  begin to dump their stock in bulk even at substantial
loss, sending the index tumbling, creating panic with snowballing effect,
internationally.

Distrust of government is high, deeper down, there are some shifts in
values. Americans are less socially conservative. They are more aware of the
gap between rich and poor. They are more open to government action to
reduce poverty.

Democrats have done well in suburbia recently because they have run the kind
of candidates who seem like the safer choice - socially moderate, pragmatic
and fiscally hawkish. They, or any party, will run astray if they threaten
the mood of chastened sobriety that has swept over the subdivisions.  This
is, in other words, back to basics.

Of course, we all learn from our mistakes and thereby gain experience.  It
will be a challenging as well as exciting job waiting for the new president.

(Written with assistance from various sources)

Maurice D.

Reply via email to