John Quiggin on an apocalyptic 2012 scenario

[Cain]

Specifically, Quiggin looks at what a Palin presidency would actually entail:

While we're feeling gloomy ...

... let's look ahead beyond 2012. Based solely on the likely rate of unemployment, the odds are against Obama being re-elected. As Jeff Madrick points out, the odds against a presidential re-election are long whenever the unemployment rate is above 7 per cent, and that's a virtual certainty. There are other economic variables that reliably affect voting behavior, such as income growth, but they are just as negative. And it's hard to see anything positive in the current political dynamic.

On the information we have at present, any Republican candidate other than Palin will have very good odds of winning. But there is also a fair chance that Palin will get the Republican nomination, despite her high negative ratings outside the Republican base. That would give Obama his best chance, but still no guarantee.

Starting with the worst case, how bad would a Palin Administration be ? In policy terms, it would obviously be terrible, but I'm more concerned about the prospect of Palin inheriting the monarchical powers amassed for the Presidency by the Bush and Obama Administrations. These include:

* Powers conferred by legislation under the PATRIOT Act, Military Commissions Act and so on. These would surely be greatly strengthened by a Republican Congress under Palin

* Powers claimed by Bush and Obama (for example, the power to direct the assassination of any person deemed to be a supporter of terrorism) with no specific legislative capacity

* The power, with no legal basis, to pressure corporations into taking actions against real or putative enemies of the state (wiretapping, withdrawing services from Wikileaks)

* The Bush-Obama precedent under which admittedly criminal actions taken by the President (such as ordering torture) do not give rise to any prosecution or right of redress

The main saving grace under Bush and Obama has been the fact that most of these powers have been used fairly sparingly, and never (AFAIK) against 'mainstream' political opponents of the Administration. I can't see Palin accepting any such constraint. Given the starting position, four years of unfettered power for Palin would be enough to move the US a long way in the direction taken by Russia under Putin, with a compliant media, an oligarchical ruling class subject to rapid reprisals for any display of political independence, and dissidents are subject to all kinds of harassment up to and including assassination.

I can't see anything that would be likely to stop this. A victory for Palin would imply a strong swing to the Republicans giving them at least a Senate majority. They would surely kill the filibuster rule if they needed to, so the closest thing to a constraint would be the Supreme Court, which did rule against some of the worst Bush excesses. The changes in the make-up of the Court since then make this fairly weak reed even weaker.

Perhaps I'm being too gloomy here – feel free to point out where I'm wrong.

Turning to other possibilities, any other Republican candidate would surely have to give some pretty big payoffs to Palin and the far right in general, and would have a better chance of winning. The movement towards authoritarianism might be less dramatic than under Palin, but it would surely continue apace.

So, about the best hope is that the Republicans will nominate Palin and that she will prove too much for the American electorate to swallow. Maybe this overreach might even cost them control of Congress. Or maybe some totally unexpected event will turn things around. And, while I'm at it, there's a nice patch of grass at the back of the house where the pony can graze.

My feeling is this is a little too Palin-centric.  At the same time, I cannot think of anyone else in the Republican Party who currently has her "brand recognition" and ability to get their voice heard in the media in the way she does.

And when the best case scenario is Palin or 4 more years of the Boy King aiding and abetting Wall Street in their looting the global financial system....urgh.

[LMNO]

Heh.  Here's what I see about a Palin presidency:

Her actions will be bizarre and ineffectual.  She will make speeches that pundits will laugh at.  She will propose socially conservative bills that will ultimately be unconstitutional.

The economy, which has started turning around (on paper, at least), finally gets some traction.  Not because of what Palin does, of course, because the economy moves too slowly for that.  However, most citizens can't fathom that, and so they think she "fixed" the economy.

Our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan slowly grinds to a halt.  Again, she doesn't really have to do anything, it will simply wind down.  But she can claim a "win".

She will deregulatebig business, and they will sing her praises in the media, which they have bought and have a stranglehold on.



And ultimately, because of things she was not responsible for, she will be remembered as a "good" president.

[Cain]

The problem with bills being "unconstitutional" is that it wont matter.  Locking people in jail without trials is "unconstitutional", and has been going on for over nine years now, and shows no sign of letting up.  The constitution is just a piece of paper, ultimately, and lawlessness in Washington has been institutionalized, first in foreign and now in domestic affairs over the past 60 odd years. 

I'm not so sure the economy will turn around, with or without anything anyone in Washington does.  I think the problems go far deeper than that, and at this point, no action can be taken to turn things around without a complete global restructuring.  Which wont happen. There will be ups and downs, but the general trend is down....all the way to the bottom.

On Iraq and Afghanistan you're probably right, though I'm still fairly convinced a run-down of those wars will be the pretext for attacking Iran, both for neoconservative ideological reasons and for the possible boost it will give to the economy (Keynesian stimulus via the Pentagon doesnt count as government spending, after all).

Deregulation of businesses as a pretext towards monopolizing industry seems a certainty.  I'm not so sure they'd need to buy up the media to get them to sing her praises....Palin practically has a spot on the Washington Post op-ed team whenever she wants it currently (thanks, Fred Hiatt!), and the media are spineless bastards too busy chasing ratings to really give a shit whether the person with their hands on the nuke codes is entirely stable.  Hell, the media only started to go after Bush in the aftermath of Katrina ie; when public opinion shifted against the administration.

I just wonder about the Republican nominee potentials.  The polls do show Palin is more favourably viewed within the GOP ranks, and more divisive outside of them (especially among independents, whose courting helped Obama win the previous election).  But I'm pretty sure come January, we will see some jockeying within the upper Republican ranks which will let us know which way the wind is blowing better.

I really do not rate Obama's chances as high though, if he goes into the 2012 election with a 10% employment rate....not at all...

[Jenne]

She's a female GWB.  Basically, she has the potential to bring us into countless stupid ass acts of and engagements of war, decimate any legislative good that's been done in the last century, and will have her dumbass electorate thinking she's awesome because they can identify with her dumbass.

The wreckage wrought by Bush?  Might seem slight in comparison if she has a Rove or Cheney that will use her and push her into whatever GOP agenda is on the books...what I worry about is not history and how she'll LOOK but instead how retired the freedom to move about the country is becoming.  And how convincing she'll make it that this is all "for the best, just trust Mama Bear."

[Adios]

We are going downhill and gaining speed. Common sense and moderation is dead.

Is your exit strategy in place?