it's gas prices, stupid!

[montana500]

Americans only care about what effects them on a daily basis. Im betting the only reason for Bush's numbers drop is high gas prices. It seemed to be the trend before.
We need to use gas prices big time in the 2006 elections and in 2008. If this is not a main (if not THE main) focal point for dem strategists we are in trouble.

[Arkansas Democrat]

1. I agree

totally! I sure wish some of the Dems would get on out in the media and talk about the fuel prices NOW!!

[Orrex]

4. I think that they think that they're in an awkward position

If they criticize Dubya for the ever-escalating gas prices and prices subsequently decline, then they'll be condemned for fear-mongering. Dubya will claim that his leadership (and his Strong Economy) led to the price reduction.

If they criticize Dubya for the ever-escalating gas prices and prices continue to rise, then they'll be condemned for partisan bickering and for making a bad situation worse. Dubya will claim that only his leadership can see us through this crisis, and he'll propose additional permanent tax cuts for the super-wealthy to help bolster his Strong Economy.


Dems also have to account for why they haven't said shit about this up until now; if it were such a big issue, they'd have been addressing it before it was a full-blown disaster. As it is, they'll look like petty opportunists.


Of course, Clinton, Gore, or Kerry would already have been impeached by a Republican Congress for failing to bring back dollar-per-gallon prices, but that's different...

[lostinacause]

2. I disagree.

The problem with high gas prices is largely to do with factors outside of Bush's control. Decision that he made that do effect gas prices are better to use for their overall effect mentioning gas prices as only a small consequence of the overall decision.

[montana500]

3. hmmm

"The problem with high gas prices is largely to do with factors outside of Bush's control. Decision that he made that do effect gas prices are better to use for their overall effect mentioning gas prices as only a small consequence of the overall decision."



That's the thoughtful liberal act. That's not smart politics. Smart politics says you do whatever you can to make Bush appear more at fault, and you make those who voted for his energy plan in congress directly attached to him.

[lostinacause]

7. There is very good economic evidence that is easy

to understand that would suggest that Bush's influence over the price of gas is limited. If blaming Bush over gas prices on Bush got any steam it could surly be crushed by this evidence. Then Bush and friends could continue to assert that the democrats "know nothing about the economy".

It is also better to say "You think gas prices are bad. That is the least of your concerns, wait until you see the long term effects of ..."

[montana500]

11. you cant operate like that

"understand that would suggest that Bush's influence over the price of gas is limited. If blaming Bush over gas prices on Bush got any steam it could surly be crushed by this evidence. Then Bush and friends could continue to assert that the democrats "know nothing about the economy".

It is also better to say "You think gas prices are bad. That is the least of your concerns, wait until you see the long term effects of ..."""



You are playing their game. You need to just sling as much crap as possible and see what sticks. There's nothing to lose at this point. Worry about losing ground when you actually have ground to lose.

[lostinacause]

14. Look at how well their game is working for them. I believe, though I am

not sure, that there is a say that goes something along the lines of; "If you throw crap you get your own hands dirty". While I am not usually one for slogans, this one seems to fit. Saying something that is so easily refuted such as you suggest only serves to damage ones own credibility. If you think the Democrats can’t get any worse of a reputation you are mistaken. Though it is difficult parties can become irrelevant if the right circumstances exist.

[sueh]

5. Even so, high gas prices should be held against Bush.

Repugs hold things against Democrats that Democrats have no control over, either. Repugs are very good at making Dems look bad, we need to make Repugs look bad. Democrats on the Hill should have their faces in media cameras asking Bush why he won't open up the oil reserves and give Americans relief from the burden of high gas prices.

[lostinacause]

8. That is perhaps the only option they have.

It too is a risky idea. It is risky parley based on the possibility of rising prices. If the price continues to rise the democrats propose this solution and Bush uses it just as gas prices start to go down he looks like a saint.

[montana500]

12. it's not risky at all

you slam for the rising gas prices while referring to Gore and others plans for energy independence ( of which everoyne knows Gore has been blabbing about for years).

[lostinacause]

19. While many economists would say that this would not be that effective,

this may work. Again you will have to contend with "The market does it better" type of comments. It really becomes one person's here say against the others.

[Stil]

21. One thing he does have control of.

Is the strategic reserves.

http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/reserves/spr/index.html

"On November 13, 2001, President George W. Bush ordered the SPR to be filled to approximately 700 million barrels by continuing to use the Royalty-in-Kind program carried out jointly between the Department of Energy and the Department of the Interior. The royalty-in-kind program applies to oil owed to the U.S. government by producers who operate leases on the federally-owned Outer Continental Shelf. These producers are required to provide from 12.5 percent to 16.7 percent of the oil they produce to the U.S. government. The government can either acquire the oil itself or receive the equivalent dollar value."


Delivery Schedule as of:

August 15, 2005

Scheduled
Month year (MB)
July 2005 2412

Aug 2005 2045

Little more info


http://www.fe.doe.gov/news/techlines/2005/tl_rik_spr.html

[Tommy_J]

6. No doubt, gas prices are hurting him...

Could this be what would stop him from attacking Iran? 'Cause you know if he did we'd have $5/gallon

[NinetySix]

9. I saw them pointing out on CNN that, adjusted for inflation,

gas prices in 1981 ($1.41 at the time) amount to around $3.06 in 2005 dollars. I gasped in astonishment; did they mention that in 1981 we were in the depths of the Reagan recession? No, of course not.

Why not just tell us what the price of gas was during the deflationary period of the Great Depression, then tell us, "see, paying a lot for gas is actually a GOOD thing, because it means the economy is doing really well!"

[Orrex]

13. Wage adjustment?

$3.06 is 2.17 x $1.41, so let's use 2.17 as our factor:

In 1981 the Federal Minimum Wage was $3.35 per hour. Multiplying that by 2.17 we get about $7.27 as the current adjusted equivalent minimum wage in today's dollars. I believe that the current Federal Minimum Wage is $5.15 per hour, or an equivalent of $2.37 in 1981 dollars. Does it still seem like we're getting bargain-rate gas prices today?

I know that it's not a straight 1:2.17 ratio, but I think that the point is served.

And that's just the minimum wage. I don't have time to crunch the numbers, but I understand that it's well established that current middle class income levels do not compare favorably with those of 25 years ago.

So whenever someone hits me with that old "it was worse back then" argument, I ask them for the equivalent adjusted figures of other key measures. When they can't produce any, I pat them on the head, smile pleasantly, and walk away.

[lostinacause]

16. It is always good to keep things in perspective. –nt

[maxsolomon]

10. au contraire, lostinacause

bush is president now. gas prices are rising now. therefore, he is responsible. that's as complicated an argument as the american people want to hear.

and if you think there's NOTHING he can do, you're delusional. the strategic oil reserve could be tapped to cool the market. he could "jawbone" OPEC like he promised. he's not even trying.

and the dems are stupid if they can't make hay out of that.

[lostinacause]

17. I disagree. While the arguement may appeal to some I don't believe that

the Democrats could win on something that is close to a lie.

There are two reasons why tapping the strategic oil reserve would be useless. Right now many analysts expect the price to continue to rise and most importantly what happens if there is a supply shock. Having these reserves would be important if there was an immediate decrease in the amount of oil available.

[don954]

15. In a nutshell

[barb162]

18. Wow, that's a great poster. I'd like to stick it on the windshield

of every SUV that has the ribbons on supporting the troops

[barb162]

20. Wow, that's a great poster. I'd like to stick it on the windshield

of every SUV that has the ribbons on supporting the troops