LyrArc Article Gist
Stuart Stevens, the chief strategist of the Romney campaign points to the Romney campaign's success in getting a majority of votes of people making over $50,000, a majority of white voters under 30 by a 7 point margin, winning the votes of a majority of America's middle class, and falling short of a win of the Electoral College by 320,000 votes. He says Obama turned Democratic party weaknesses of being too liberal and too dependent on minorities into advantages. The Pew Research Center and other expert opinion cited as the principal reaon for the defeat, Romneys failure to empathize with voters. He appeared callous in his image with Hispanic voters with his self-deportation stand, and similiarly his position on the auto bailout was shown as callous in a barrage of political ads by the Obama campaign in the midwestern states, the remark about the 47% dependent on government help simply reinforced this notion of being insensitive to concerns of the less affluent. The candidate never succeeded in shaking off impressions in the minds of voters of being a private equity executive who could not empathize with weaker sections of the community, which were reinforced by heavy negative advertising in the 2012 election. Stevens says nothing about the short sightedness of a callous immigration policy of self-deportation adopted by a former governor of Massachusetts, in the face of Census statistics showing more children of minorities, especially Hispanics, born each year than children of any other demographic group in the U.S. The changing demographics may have made a crucial difference in many states....

LyrArc Article Gist
A Romney win would end the gridlock in Washington reducing the political uncertainty in Washington D.C., with both Republicans and Democrats supporting short term efforts to revive the economy. This would increase confidence for business investment and create a better business climate after the divisive politics of the last 4 years. An alternative scenario in which this happens is a large Obama win with Republicans offering cooperation with the new administration, which is less likely with the condition of the economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Dana Milbank of the WP says the views of some Democrats on Trump as a good Republican nominee based on the notion that he has high negative perception with voters is fraught with dangers for U.S. democracy. Milbank points out that this ignores what is good for the country. Having Trump as the nominee of one of the two main parties would create a divisive atmosphere and is not good for the country, says Milbank. In comparing Trump with Cruz, he says Trump is likely to follow his instincts to operate outside the U.S. constitutional system. Cruz as a person believes in the U.S. constitution and would never endorse violence or action against minorities. Cruz has not done enough to come across as a likable person with his persistent focus on conservative or Reagan values to the exclusion of everything else. This is changing in mid-April 2016 following a CNN interview with the Cruz family, a MSNBC town hall answering questions from undecided voters, and NYT coverage of Cruz at a Brooklyn bakery, that shows a different human face that people have never seen about Cruz. Cruz's self-deprecating humor in a NYT article where he talks about voters not liking "a hectoring scold," is part of this needed change that could have happened earlier in the campaign. About Trump Milbank cites Conservative party prime minister Cameron who says Trump would unite all Britons against him if he ever came to Britain....

LyrArc Article Gist
Rick Perry faces criticism from Republican candidates Romney, Bachmann, Huntsman and Paul at the Republican presidential candidate debate in Tampa on September 12, 2011. Perry defended his remarks on Social Security by telling viewers- "slam dunk guaranteed that program is going to be in place." Romney suggested Perry had been served four aces for his jobs record in Texas. And Santorum accused Perry of providing education assistance to illegal immigrants to attract the Latino vote. Perry defended his remarks on Fed chairman Bernanke printing money amounting to treasonous behaviour.

LyrArc Article Gist
Galston points out that what has changed between 2008 and 2016 for Hillary Clinton is that she faces more left leaning voters in the Democratic primaries. Yet he says Sanders has not been able to get the huge turnout of first time voters in Iowa comparable to Mr. Obama, which is needed to give him the advantage over Clinton.

LyrArc Article Gist
During the presidential debates Donald Trump was asked about his proposal for a 45% tariff on imports from China to the U.S.. Trump's response was "if they don't behave." he would use this as a negotiating tactic against China. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas responded by reminding viewers of the high tariffs under Smoot-Hawley legislation that were one of the factors that created the Great Depression in the 1930's. Economist and former Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke is a student of the Great Depression, and says "it was highly counterproductive, it lengthened and deepened the Great Depression." Economist Peter Petri of Brandeis University in his study cited in this article, says that the tit for tat that starts with such a move could eventually cost the U.S. 1 million jobs. It might fix one problem the one of imbalanced trade with China his figures show, and create another huge problem the loss of markets for U.S. goods all over the world. Overall a 45% tariff would reduce U.S. merchandise imports by $383 billion and reduce U.S. merchandise exports by $658 billion, says Petri. Gordon Hanson, economist at the University of California, San Diego, who has actually shown how trade has affected different counties in the U.S., leaving some dependent on government assistance. Hanson sees this tariff as counterproductive, it makes the U.S. more self-sufficient but hurts U.S. exporters, would significantly hurt the tech boom, and reduce America's standard of living. The problem is that everybody can get into this in a tit for tat. France did this even before the Smoot Harley Act of 1938 was passed in 1930 with 60% increase in tariff on individual items, by higher tariff legislation in 1928. Close allies Canada followed quickly after Smoot Hawley increasing its tariffs, so did Great Britain. Unemployment went up significantly after 1931, worsened by weak banks and lack of support from the Federal Reserve. Trade with Mexico would come to a halt Petri shows, and the result would be more Mexicans trying to cross the border turning a relatively non existent problem of immigration in 2015 -with Mexicans preferring to remain home and net immigration dropping significantly following the 2008 financial crisis and the strict Obama policy of deporting illegal immigrants- into a real one. Trump says its just a threat, but it is likely to lead to a tit for tat response by China, then by U.S. allies, other trading partners. Consider that president Herbert Hoover opposed the Smoot Hawley bill for raising tariffs on industrial goods, and only proposed adifferent legislation reducing tariffs on industrial goods and increasing the tariffs on agricultural goods to give relief to American farmers. Politics intervened as Smoot from Utah and Hawley from Oregon, from mountain and agricultural states with a lack of understanding of how the international trading system works but as heads of two influential commmittes, the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, let politics overrride and pushed their legislation through Congress. In 1932 Smoot and Hawley were defeated for reelection, but the damage had been done, and promises of better conditions for workers and farmers never kept. A significant reason for the U.S. standard of living is that it is a leader in the global trading system. Even in 1945 and the years following the end of the war tariffs were higher in Britain and other countries. In return for this leadership the U.S. enjoys the advantages of the dollar being the main global currency, and the advantages of a world leading technological sector that has large global markets. Hanson and Autor have pointed out how imbalanced trade has hurt some counties in the U.S. This is a very real problem for workers in the manufacturing sector, as shown by elections in the midwestern states, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and other parts of the country. The problem is compounded by the tech sector looking out for itself, the financial sector looking out for itself, and forgetting that we are all in the same boat. And that includes the Chinese who are in the same boat. China is doing a major shift in policy towards a consumer driven economy, and this needs to be accelerated for the benefit of ordinary Chinese. This makes the policy of a 45% tariff by the U.S. doubly unproductive because it hopes to add urgency to the problem of the U.S. trade deficit and manufacturing workers, but takes an approach that risks ending up damaging the global trading system by setting in motion a process that no one controls or can foresee the destination....

LyrArc Article Gist
Zalmay Khalizad, a former diplomat to Iraq, reports from Iraq after discussions with prominent Iraqis, describes the state of U.S. relations with Iraq under the Abadi government. He says the Ayatollah Sistani in Iraq prime minister Abadi, and Iraqi public opinion, now favor improved relations with the U.S. following the sectarianism promoted by prime minister Maliki and Iran's expanded role in Iraq. Other reports show Iraqi opinion in transition as the U.S. withdrawal promoted by Maliki has led to 2 million refugees, and huge dislocation of people with the expansion of Islamic State from Syria into Iraq. The change in opinion is also towards promoting better relations with Sunni countries. People in the region do not see a bright future with an increase in religious tensions that only lead to more destructive behaviours and increase in refugees. Towards the end of the Bush administration there was some hope that Iraq would see a bright future, only to see this reversed under Maliki's sectarian policies. U.S. public opinion has shifted away from any involvement following the failure of the people in the region to resolve differences and live peacefully. The cost of the wars with little gained as a result of the failure of the people in the region to work together in the common interest is a part of the public debate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. Sectarianism in the region is the root cause of the growth of the Islamic State and the expansion of the war in Syria, and this has not only worsened the situation for the people in the region, delayed economic development given large oil resources, and left the region worse off than before. It has also led to the refugee flow into Europe worsening the situation in the European Union, adding to tensions in European societies such as France, Germany, Denmark and Sweden, following terrorist attacks and political parties promoting fear of immigrants. What started as a U.S. response to terrorism originating in this region in New York, followed by the war in Iraq, has led to more convulsions in this region, a huge number of refugees, whole country populations displaced, and requires a fresh rethinking about what people in the region can do to live and work together and promote the peaceful participation of people in their own development and growth, before Western societies consider further involvement. The statement about lost to Iran in the title also suggests framing of statements in the old way that are the root of the problem. When the dust settles years from now Iranians, Iraqis, Saudis, Yemeni, Turkish, Pakistani, Indian and other Muslim societies may want to look back at this period as reflecting the dangers of getting caught up in the geopolitics of world powers, letting religious sentiment override calmer thinking, and reflect on the brighter aspects of the common Islamic heritage in Iran, Turkey, India, expressed humanly as it is always is in different ways and forms. They can also take hope and confidence in the fact that European societies have struck the same rocks and emerged calmer, wiser, and better than before....

LyrArc Article Gist
Fisher and Taub of the NYT look at the populist politics in Europe and the U.S. following the French election first round. Trump won in the U.S. with the deep polarization of politics in the U.S.- leading to the Republican Party to decide to support him to avoid the result of four more years of an administration led by Democrats, and with the support of discontented voters in midwestern states with falling living standards. The situation in Europe is different as the mainstream parties have united in the past to block populist politicians with negative messages on immigration and an open economy. This happened in the Dutch election, by the co-opting of the nationalist message of populist politicians by mainstream parties and mainstream politicians, and is likely to continue in the French and German elections in 2017. Fisher and Taub point to another development that is happening- shifting the debate to ethnonationalism vs. open economies, which has happened with Brexit and the UK Independence Party. They cite the 2015 British elections in which UKIP won 13 percent of the vote, as having influenced prime minister Cameron to call for a referendum on Brexit, in a effort to revive the fortunes of the Conservative Party. In the end this resulted in the 52 percent vote supporting Brexit.  Another way of looking at the populist movement is that with Trump it called attention to trade and the way working class Americans were being marginalized especially in the industrial midwest. With this problem being addressed in a Trump administration and a reviving economy, the mainstream parties have an opportunity to reassert themselves. In Europe the AfD called attention to immigration issues, and the Merkel coalition government of CDU and SPD by making changes such as the deal with Turkey, and returning economic refugees, is able to assert the role of mainstream parties. In Britain the situation could be a result of a brash decision by a Conservative prime minister Cameron, in making a bad miscalculation, that has put Britain on a course that is likely not in its best interest. The Brexit referendum yes vote galvanized opinion by showing an endless stream of refugees in their advertising- a development following the opening of borders by Germany and Austria to address the plight of Syrian war refugees. That situation has passed and is unlikely to happen again as both the SPD and CDU parties in Germany have pointed out that this was a one time situation that they responded to following the exodus from Keleti rail station in Hungary under special circumstances. With this kind of perspective populist politics can be seen as reflecting other voices in a democracy, that are heard and responded to, yet keeping the sense of balance and openness necessary in today's global economy and societies. This is also the perception of Germany's outgoing popular president Gauck in his final address, pointing to the need to listen to other voices in a democracy, and the need for openness in a democracy, as well as democracies always in the process of Becoming and evolving to adapt to new situations in economy, society, and politics.     ...