There are three weeks left before the election. Recent polling information indicates the Republican message is not working. Therefore, I would expect some Republican candidates to change their message. One of the most obvious new choices to talk about is the economy because the macro-level economic numbers are good.
However, there are two competing economic narratives about the current economy. The Republican narrative focuses on reciting macro-numbers with little explanation. For example, "The unemployment rate is 4.6%. Therefore the economy is in great shape." The Democrats use more on an emotional analysis, such as "what kind of job are you able to find?" Both narratives are correct from their own perspectives.
One of the central problems with the current expansion is the high level of nuance it involves. Referring to the example above the unemployment rate
is low. However, wages and median income have not meaningfully increased beyond inflation since hitting the economically important 5% unemployment rate in December 2005. This indicates the jobs the economy is creating are not of similar or higher quality to the jobs lost. But did you notice how long and complicated the preceding explanation was? It's not great 30-second soundbite material.
Therefore, it is imperative for Democrats to use personalized emotional questions to highlight this economy's flaws. Here's an example.
Republican candidate: "We're at 4.6% unemployment. Anyone who wants a find a job can find a job."
Democratic Candidate: "But what kind of job will you find? Can you feed your family with the job you find? Will you have health insurance?
The Democratic Candidate making this statement is taking a leap of faith on this issue because he won't actually hear the response. But the underlying wage data mentioned above confirms the basic problem - that we're replacing higher paying jobs with low-paying jobs.
Here's another example with tax cuts:
Republican Candidate: "The tax cuts are responsible for the booming economy."
Democratic Candidate: "Have you actually benefited from the tax cuts? Where are your tax cuts?"
According to the Tax Policy Center nearly 60% of the combined Bush tax cuts went to incomes higher than $100,000 and nearly 70% of the benefits went to incomes levels above $75,000. In other words, most people haven't even seen a meaningful cut in their taxes.
Here's another example using incomes.
Republican Candidate: "Disposable income is increasing. Therefore the economy is doing great!"
Democratic Candidate: "Does your income buy more than it did a few years ago? Or are you dipping into savings or refinancing your home to get more money?"
Again, underlying nuanced interpretation of the economy indicates the above Democratic candidates will apply to most people. Savings is now negative. Economic growth estimates without mortgage equity withdrawal who GDP growth half as strong as reported in the official GDP numbers.
In short, this economy has benefited the top tier of income earners and corporations at the expense of a wide-swath of the electorate. Use the following chart as a reference. This chart shows the percentage of national income going to wages and corporate profits. The chart indicates that a large percentage of the economic gains are going to corporations and by definition people who benefit from capital gains the dividend:
So - the Democratic candidate should always personalize information, essentially asking a voter, "how are you personally doing?" The answer will be a resounding "not so good."