Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Which "ist" are you?

Are you a good witch or a bad witch? No, wrong question.

Apparently the Obama camp and the periphery are dividing into "transformationalists," who want to take an electoral mandate for a spin and the "incrementalists" who take a cautious Clinton-like view to proceeding.

Are you a good witch or a bad witch?

5 comments:

Lula O said...

I'm going to go with the bad witch. Other than I must now fear H2O, I am unfamiliar with your political speak. Will you translate?

Peter said...

Do you think the new administration should dramatically try to transform American government/politics (a sweeping "100 Days" plan or so) or edge along cautiously without stepping on toes?

Which witch is witch of course is a question of perspective...

Lula O said...

I'm going to shoot for flying monkey. I'm torn between him winning again or actual progress. Hmm....

schmidlap said...

Put me down for burning down the whole forest to let the little trees grow.

Carlos said...

FDR-like transformationalism is what I'd like to see. But there are pragmatic ways to do it. For example, let Bush's tax cuts for the rich expire in 2010. Introduce health care, but implement it fully in stages. Bail out the auto industry NOW, with many strings attached, and introduce a HUGE stimulus package NOW. Proceed with the middle class tax cuts and accept higher deficits to stimulate economic activity.

No matter what Obama does, there will always be those who say, it's not enough, or it's too much. But if politics is the art of the possible, then the window to do BIG things is now. By the time midterm elections roll around the window will have closed and it'll be too late.