Is Paul Ryan Gen-Xers’ only hope?
posted at 1:11 pm on August 16, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
So says Kirsten Powers in the Daily Beast. Forget Republicans and Democrats, the center-left commentator writes — this election is about Baby Boomers vs everyone else in America. Mitt Romney has chosen the first major-ticket representative of what Powers calls The Screwed Generation, and Ryan may be their last hope to keep from falling into economic servitude to the Boomers for life:
Unfortunately, the future looks as bleak for today’s young people. No amount of coddling by their well-provided-for Boomer parents can save Generation Y and the Millennials from the dire economic conditions they face, including criminal levels of educational debt. Pensions have gone the way of the horse and buggy. You want to retire with health-care benefits, as both my professor parents did? Good luck. As the 1994 movie turned Gen-X mantra has it: Reality Bites.
Generation X chronicler Jeff Gordiner, has written that Gen-Xers suffer from “athazagoraphobia”—“an abnormal and persistent fear of being forgotten or ignored.” Except it’s not really a phobia; it’s been reality for a long time. Maybe that is about to change.
Enter Ryan. While Democrats attack his Medicare plan as “radical” and portray him as pushing granny off the cliff, young people don’t seem to be buying this caricature. Or maybe “radical” is what they want. …
Jon Cowan, the CEO of the centrist think tank Third Way told me, “Ryan is doing the country a huge service by putting this on the table.” Cowan is the former founder of Lead or Leave, a Gen X group that gained prominence in the 1990s as it rang the alarm bells for reducing the deficit and dealing with entitlements. He doesn’t believe Ryan’s plan is the best way to reform Medicare, though he concedes that it is a serious plan. He cautions that Democrats may find themselves in political peril in the next 10 years if they don’t come up with a substantive alternative plan. He says, “There are a lot of younger voters who say of the Ryan plan, ‘at least I get something… at least there is a plan’. If you don’t get in there and offer a plan you give up the high ground on policy.”
Yes, our expectations for government benefits when we retire have been lowered so much that the idea that we would get anything at all seems like a bonanza. Ryan’s plan also seems a lot less scary when you consider that his partner on it is the liberal Oregon Senator Ron Wyden.
It’s not just Zogby’s numbers that back Powers’ argument. Survey USA polled registered voters in Florida, where Ryan’s addition to the ticket supposedly spelled doom for Romney in a state heavy with current retirees. Surprisingly, Ryan polled best among seniors — and almost as good with voters under 35. On the key question of whether Ryan made voters more or less likely to vote for Mitt Romney, Ryan was a +15 overall at 57/42 among those whose minds were changed at all. Among seniors, it’s a +28 (64/36), but among those under 35, it’s +28 at 62/36, and this demographic had the highest percentage of mind-changing by far at 30% (14% of seniors changed their mind with the Ryan pick). That’s a direct challenge to Obama’s base of voter enthusiasm.
That’s why I write today in my column for The Fiscal Times that Romney’s gamble on Ryan is already paying off, both in polling and in the direction of the debate:
Romney took a big gamble with Ryan in two ways – in betting that Obama wouldn’t take the challenge for a substantive debate, and that voters will know the difference. A few days later, it’s clear that Romney won the first bet, and is at least ahead on the second. …
That still left the risk that Obama would take the gauntlet flung down by Romney’s selection of Ryan and go toe-to-toe with Romney in a debate between supply-side and populist economics. In times of economic hardship, populism sells, as politicians well know, mainly because of its simplistic division of haves and have-nots as the basis for redistributive policies. As the Associated Press acknowledged yesterday (and many of us have argued since the first Recovery Summer in 2010), we have the worst post-World War II economic recovery in US history in nearly every category, which means that the populist One Percenter populism which Obama has fed since last year might still have life left within it.
That risk still exists, but at least from the way Obama and Joe Biden have reacted to Ryan’s appointment, it has faded considerably. Has Team Obama taken up the gauntlet and offered a rebuttal to Romney’s view of government? Hardly. On Tuesday of this week, ABC’s Jake Tapper reported from three separate events [note: now four times -- Ed] that the President of the United States was reduced to talking about Seamus The Roof Riding Dog, a story dug up from a 1983 Romney family vacation, as an argument for his re-election. The super-PAC run by his former White House media staffer “accidentally” had its controversial ad run in Ohio, which strongly implied that Romney caused the cancer-related death of a laid-off steelworker’s spouse.
That was hardly the worst of it, though. On the same day, the Vice President spoke to a crowd in Danville, Virginia about Romney’s plan to unleash Wall Street from all regulation. Speaking to a crowd with a significant number of African-American voters, Biden slipped into a Southern cant to warn them that “they goin’ to put y’all back in chains.” When confronted about Biden’s race-baiting, the Obama campaign refused to apologize, claiming that the Romney campaign took the remark out of context.
Clearly, the incumbents have no desire to engage Romney and Ryan in a serious debate. Romney’s big all-in raise with Ryan has now made that crystal clear.
Actually, in my column I explain why shifting to a larger scope of the structure of the federal budget, entitlements, and staggering unfunded liabilities wasn’t really that big of a gamble — and how sticking to just jobs and the economy may have been a bigger risk. Be sure to read the whole thing.
This race is far from over. However, the disarray in Team Obama to Ryan’s entry into the race makes it clear that Romney has won the first round in this high-stakes move, and it may keep paying dividends all the way to the election.
Update: Gary Gross has more thoughts on KP’s essay. And thanks to Jack Fowler for linking my column at The Corner with some kind words about my argument why it wasn’t all that much of a gamble.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Report: Oversight on IRS targeting came from Washington all along

DOJ seized logs for five Fox News phones, possibly James Rosens’ parents’ house






Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
Yes. Now please tell us why you believe she was telling the truth when she said those words. And why you are desperately bending over backwards to give her and O’bama the benefit of the doubt in this matter, when we know you would have never done had this tragedy happened on Bush and Rice’s Watch.
But before doing so, please remember that many folks here on the Right Side of the blogosphere confirmed last fall that when she said those words, youtube’s own records (the view count for the video) showed that hardly anyone had viewed that “evil video” at the time she Lied about it on TV. You are familiar with the mechanics of youtube view counts, aren’t you?
F-
Del Dolemonte on May 7, 2013 at 5:33 PM
verbaluce on May 7, 2013 at 5:29 PM
You’re a sad figure for typing that comment. If you don’t know it, you can’t be helped.
I told you immediately after it happened what was behind it. Amb. Stevens should have been in the bunker of the main embassy, in Tripoli, that day. It’s the MO of all major embassies, on such days. All else went sour from there and is a huuuuuge cover up, to keep Obama in power.
It’s very sad that you, of all the trolls, are as insane as all the others on this topic.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:33 PM
Paul Mirengoff at Power Line:
Del Dolemonte on May 7, 2013 at 5:36 PM
Media, most of you, suffocate from consuming Obama’s shit. It ain’t Beluga caviar and you all deserve to be depleted of oxygen over such dereliction of duty.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM
Why, you are already here. Your histrionics continues to amuse. You aren’t interested in a genuine investigation. You’re a pathetic little hack with your head so far up Obama’s azz it’s comical. Oh, and who is going to lead a genuine investigations? The democrats? The State Dept? The media? ROFLMAO!!!!! Your pathetic attempts to chastise commenters here who want the truth are a laugh riot.
Now phuck off and go back to blowing your Obama doll.
HumpBot Salvation on May 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM
Petraeus should burn in Hell on Earth, and then some.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM
verbie you lost your 2% of credibility on this thread. You are now the same as all the others, sadly.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:38 PM
Obama, McCain and Rubio were fully pushing the Libya invasion.
Obama owns Benghazi.
Hillary owns Benghazi.
Benghazi proved, without a shred of doubt, that Hillary is as dumb at 3:00a.m., when the phone rings, as is Obama.
Obama flew to Vegas to campaing, the next day, after he’d gone to sleep after being told the embassy was on fire.
Some caring characters they are.
Most derelict are the parents of Amb. Stevens. Were they not so leftist they’d have pushed for answers before the election. How derelict are they?
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:41 PM
verbie, you’re needed on the Sheila Jackson Lee thread.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 5:44 PM
Yeah sorry no. Based on the various revisions to the “talking points” out there, it’s pretty clear they were edited in a way that made it possible to push the patently false youtube video narrative, i.e. removed all references to AQ, Ansar al-Sharia, weapons and militants in Libya. To say their later statements reflect what they got from the CIA … lol.
rightmind on May 7, 2013 at 5:45 PM
You’re lying, verbaluce.
blink on May 7, 2013 at 5:57 PM
And as I offered back then, a valid point to question why Stevens wasn’t more secure…or provided with more security.
(And thanks…but I’ll leave you to whatever i going on re: Shelia Jackson.)
verbaluce on May 7, 2013 at 6:01 PM
Yea…everyone’s lying.
/sarc
verbaluce on May 7, 2013 at 6:02 PM
You clearly lied. You falsely claimed that they didn’t knowingly provide false information.
Even the admin itself is now admitting that it knowingly provided false information (while justifying it by saying that they were protecting classified info).
You just decided to blatantly lie.
blink on May 7, 2013 at 6:07 PM
Benghazi Embassy:
The official told story, as of now seems to be falling apart at a fast and ferocious paced. Just thinking about some things that may not mean anything but here goes!
Looking back to the internet posting of 11-13 September 2012, there are literally 10,000′s posting stating in one manner or another that Sam Bacile and his film caused the riots that caused the deaths. Then almost nothing until he is arrested and gets 1 year in federal prison for parole violation. Then nothing after that he seems to completely disappear of the grid. There seems to be some indication that he may be out and under Federal protection but nothing provable.
The internet acts fast BUT 10,000′s postings all pointing to a film, with in 24 hrs, look a lot more like a mass mailing then news and opinion reporting. There is very limited evidence of any sustainability of outrage.
Next thing I fine most interesting is: If all this was outrage caused by the film, then why is the film still available on Youtube and no one in the world cares anymore?
Just all seems a bit strained of ones imagination.
jpcpt03 on May 7, 2013 at 6:23 PM
Nope. Go back and read the thread.
Um, it would bother me if ANY Commander-in-Chief did it. I was and still am bothered about what was said in the lead up to the Iraq War.
Um, it means that he was NOT acting as a Commander-in-Chief should when the first Ambassador in 33 years has gone missing – he wasn’t told until the following morning that Stevens had died even though it was known before then.
Why would any President not be concerned enough to about a missing Ambassador and an attack on the Benghazi consulate? Why would he NOT being in touch with the Secretary of Defence?
And, we deserve the TRUTH about it.
A sitting American President lied to the American public, his fellow citizens, for political reasons about a terrorist attack and, therefore, was actually covering up the real reason behind the attack: Islamists militants and Al Qaeda in a country that he decided to destabilise by acting militarily without the consent of Congress and during an election when his narrative that ‘GM is alive, OBL is dead, and AQ is on the run.’
See Bob Scheiffer and Salon mag, to name two, about that.
Resist We Much on May 7, 2013 at 6:37 PM
What genuine investigation?
The Mullins-Pickering investigation that failed to interview Hillary Clinton?
The one that would not allow – think how Orwellian that is – Congress access to the survivors and went so far as to change the names of them in their own medical records?
The one that didn’t interview the people on the ground?
The one where the Obama administration said ‘No comment pending the report of the ARB’ and then started squawking that ‘Benghazi happened a long time ago. We need to move on…’?
Resist We Much on May 7, 2013 at 6:54 PM
Nice attempt at lowering expectations.
J/K Verbie, that was actually a pathetic attempt.
JusDreamin on May 7, 2013 at 7:15 PM
ted c on May 7, 2013 at 7:17 PM
I have known a number of federal agents. Up to a point, most feds just do as they are told and they have good days and bad and weak sisters (excuse the sexism) in different jobs.
As indicated above, the entire video and spontaneous protest meme was absurd from the start. So the obvious question is who was selling it or ordering people to include it in the narrative?
It certainly lived long enough. It was publicly cited by the two Dem POTUS candidates in statements. Money was spent on TV ads in Pakistan.
Repeat, slowly…“money was spent on TV ads in Pakistan”.
LOL
And these people control nuclear weapons and a billion rounds of ammo in DHS!
IlikedAUH2O on May 7, 2013 at 7:20 PM
So I see not Bret hair, or bill o idiot is talking about the whistleblowers.mwell there you have it. No big deal mova along
Conservative4ev on May 7, 2013 at 8:04 PM
Pretty sure the sign on Obama’s desk reads, “The Buck Stops …. uhhhh, in the Bush Administration.”
There Goes the Neighborhood on May 8, 2013 at 12:23 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3