Undead economic cliche: Republicans are good money-managers

As I’ve blogged about several times, Republicans have a huge edge in branding: “Their brand is known to be “shitty, bigoted authoritarians.” Democrats, by contrast, are supposed to be decent people. When Republicans act like scum, there’s a sense of shrug; when Democrats do it, there’s a sense of shock. We’re supposed to govern well, and clean up the mess Republicans make when they have power.”

Democrats are seen as the Mommy Party, the nurturers and caregivers; Republicans are the tough, authoritarian Daddy Party. That’s bad for dems as “going up against cardinal masculine virtues like violence, wealth, and the unchecked use of power taints you with a feminine stain, and in our society, femininity is disdained.” (Jess Zimmerman).

I also think a lot of people still think of Republicans as sensible 1950s conservatives, “Sober men in suits, pipes, who’d nod thoughtfully over their latest tract on market-driven fiscal conservatism while grinding out the numbers on rocket science. Remember those serious-looking 1950’s-1960’s science guys in the movies — Republican to a one. They were the grown-ups. They were the realists. Sure they were a bummer, maaaaan, but on the way to La Revolution you need somebody to remember where you parked the car.” As noted at the link, they’d turned into the party of fantasy and delusion — and this was back in 2004.

All of which may explain why, despite all the evidence, people still think of Republicans as the sensible economic party. They’re supposedly the ones who balance the budget, rein in government spending, grow the economy, etc., etc. Never mind that Reagan left office with a record deficit, W left office with a higher record deficit and Felon I set another record. Never mind that the poor lost ground under Reagan and inflation soared under Nixon.

I think there’s also some of what Paul Krugman has talked about, that during the run-up to the Iraq war, the press largely accepted that only warhawks had sensible views — anyone who suggested we didn’t have to Do Something about Iraq obviously didn’t understand stuff. Likewise, the Republican formula — deregulation and big tax cuts — has been accepted as the way to fix the economy, regardless of how bad the results have been. Contrary to White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Republicans don’t have a proven economic policy.

Some of which is the press’s fault. The WaPo recently declared that the Felon has a plan for the economy, he just doesn’t explain it well: ” President Donald Trump’s economic plan is causing brief pain while the nation advances to a new ‘Golden Age.’ But officials have been much less clear about what that destination will look like.” Presenting brief pain and the golden age as facts rather than propaganda is … well, I’m glad I dropped my subscription.

Which may explain why the Trump Tariffs, insanely higher than anything anticipated (and for stupider reasons), have shocked lots of businesses. Even though he talked about tariffs incessantly during his campaign, the reaction seems to have been that (as I’ve mentioned before), they bought into all the economic promises they liked (tax cuts!) and disregarded everything unpleasant. Ditto the voters who somehow convinced themselves that only a Republican could rein in the supposedly stratospheric Bidenomic inflation (as someone who lived through the 1970s, it wasn’t that bad).

Will the inevitably bad effects of the tariffs snap the spell? I wish it would, but even if it does the consequences are bad. While lots of people — hardcore Republicans primarily but not exclusively – seem awed by the Felon being tough with other countries, all he’s doing is telling the world to get along without us.

As someone who’d like to keep our economy thriving, I am not looking forward to the coming years.