(Pete Souza/White House)
So stupid.
By siding with public anger against big banks and pushing for higher taxes on millionaires, Obama may make Americans more unhappy about wide income inequality, which could hurt his re-election bid.
"Populism is predicated on people feeling that they are getting the short stick," said Jim Kessler, vice president for policy at Third Way, a nonpartisan think-tank in Washington.
"In tough economic times, optimists win presidential races and pessimists lose. It is very hard to be both a populist and have a sunny view of America's future," Kessler said.
Got that? By siding with the public on the things they are angry about, President Barack Obama risks, er, making people angry. Or something.
And you know why it's true? Because some moron Wall Street flunkie at Third Way says so! If you need a reminder of what Third Way is:
if you really want to know what Third Way is all about, just look at their Board of Trustees: 22 of the 30 come from Wall Street, including all three officers (and features the global head of equity trading at Goldman Sachs). It's nothing more than a Wall Street front group.
Their agenda can be summarized as follows:
(1.) Foreclose on Democratic voters, by opposing principle paydown or a foreclosure moritorium.
(2.) Fire Democratic voters, by slashing public sector jobs
(3.) Make the Democratic voters who still have jobs take a pay cut
(4.) Liquidate the pensions of remaining Democratic voters.
You know, the kind of things that get Wall Street all excited.
So of course a Third Way stooge will claim that striking a populist tone is wrong! On the plus side, you know that if the Third Way disapproves, Obama is doing the right thing.
Update: Pilkington, in the comments:
Populism is "pessimistic"?
WTF? So, so the "optimists" are those who are stealing the future of the American people to replenish their bank accounts?