Economic Scars Help Explain Bizarre 2016 Race
May 30 2016 - 11:01AM
Dow Jones News
By Gerald F. Seib
The search for an explanation of this year's bizarre political
climate leads to a basic conclusion: The recession that started in
2007 and the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009 scared and scarred
the electorate more deeply and more permanently than has been
recognized before.
Yes, the economic statistics say there's been a recovery -- a
relatively nice one at that. But mentally, many Americans have
never recovered, and perhaps never will. The experience has altered
their attitudes about the political and economic systems and their
leaders, and left them willing to consider risky alternatives.
What the country is experiencing "is the difference between a
car crash and having your house burn down," says Democratic
pollster Peter Hart. "A car crash is something that fades as the
three or six months mark goes by. Your house burning down is never
forgotten. It is always there and there is no half-life."
What's new here isn't that the recession was traumatic, of
course, but a dawning realization that its psychological
aftereffects have been so deep and long-lasting. Why is this
becoming clear now, as opposed to four years ago, when an incumbent
president was re-elected with relative ease? In 2012, Mr. Hart
says, "Americans were still digging out." Today, they have dug out,
yet are still feeling a hangover the isn't going away. They are
acting accordingly.
This delayed effect explains how so many allegedly smart people
failed so completely to see what was coming in the campaign of
2016. It explains the staying power of Sen. Bernie Sanders on the
Democratic side, the parallel struggles of Hillary Clinton there,
the demise of a whole string of seemingly strong but completely
conventional candidates on the Republican side, and, of course the
mind-bending rise of Donald Trump.
Here's one way of reading where we stand: The country hasn't so
much chosen Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton -- assuming she survives her
primary challenge -- as the two best alternatives, but rather has
found itself left with them at the end of a primary process in
which other alternatives were cast aside.
The deeply negative views of these two suggest Americans still
aren't finding the answers they have been seeking. Mr. Trump's
attitude fits the times but his temperament isn't really right;
Mrs. Clinton is plenty competent but also represents a bit too much
the times and the system Americans want to move beyond. The scars
may not be fully healed in 2016 any more than they were in
2012.
There is data to support this mega explanation of 2016.
Nominally the economy has been expanding for 6 1/2 years, well
above the average for a post-World War II recovery. The economy has
added jobs for 74 straight months.
Yet the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll has found that
Americans' view of the path the country is on actually has turned
darker as the economic recovery has unfolded. At the beginning of
2009, while the financial crisis was in full swing but tempered by
the optimism that accompanied the coming inauguration of Barack
Obama, 59% of Americans surveyed thought the country was off on the
wrong track.
Two years into the recovery, views actually began to darken, at
least as measured by this "wrong track" reading. By the middle of
2011, 67% said the country was off on the wrong track. By late
2013, that number had reached 78%. It has since moderated a bit,
but last month stood at 70%.
A newly published survey of American households by the Federal
Reserve helps explain this mix of anxiety and anger amid recovery.
Some 69% of adults surveyed at the end of 2015 reported that they
were either "living comfortably" or "doing OK," up from 65% in 2014
and 62% in 2013. Americans were slightly more likely to say their
financial well-being had improved during the year than to say it
had declined.
Yet those numbers mask a sense of eroding confidence born of
stagnant or declining wages and job insecurity. Just 23% said they
expected their income to be higher in the coming year. Almost half
of adults said they couldn't cover an emergency expense costing
$400, or would have to cover it by selling something or borrowing
money.
A Pew Research Center study offers a similar picture. At the
beginning of this year, 70% of Americans were dissatisfied with the
state of the economy, up from 61% at the beginning of 2007, before
crisis struck.
Economic attitudes don't fully explain the national unease, of
course. Terror scares and culture wars play a part as well.
But whatever the precise causes, the depth of the scars, and the
dissatisfaction with the alternatives, do little to suggest we
should expect some feeling of satisfaction and national unity to
emerge miraculously after the election of 2016, regardless of
outcome.
Write to Gerald F. Seib at jerry.seib@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
May 30, 2016 11:46 ET (15:46 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2016 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.