View Full Version : Democratic Party encounters 'Obama hangover' in state, local elections
incarcerated
10-24-2009, 22:38
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-politics25-2009oct25,0,2220266.story?track=rss
Democratic Party encounters 'Obama hangover' in state, local elections
By Peter Nicholas
October 25, 2009
Reporting from Kennett Square, Pa. - As he is quick to point out, President Obama is presiding over two wars, a sour economy and an epic fight to rework the nation's healthcare system.
Now tack on a trio of state and local political races. With an off-year election fast approaching, Obama is stepping up his commitment to Democratic candidates in hopes that an infusion of campaign charisma might pump up turnout.
What the party is finding, though, is that the electricity of 2008 is tough to recapture.
Some Democratic candidates running for local office around the country call the phenomenon the "Obama hangover." It is proving tougher to recruit volunteers and get people to vote.
"It's like the morning after the party," Michael McGann, a Democrat running for clerk of courts in the Philadelphia suburbs, said in an interview. "The party was wonderful and exciting. The day after it's like, 'Gee, I don't want to do that again for a while.' "
Combating the malaise, Obama is trying to galvanize voters by reminding them of the "fired up, ready to go" fervor that made last year's race riveting political theater....
Conditions look even tougher for Democrats in Virginia. A recent survey by Public Policy Polling showed Deeds trailing Republican Bob McDonnell by 12 points.
Obama's approval rating among white Virginia voters has slipped 3 points since the 2008 election, and, compounding the problem, black voters are not as excited about Deeds as they were about Obama, said Ron Faucheux, president of Clarus Research Group, a polling firm.
Worse for the Democrats, if any one constituency is energized this season it's conservatives, who are angry about rising deficits, some pollsters said.
"There's real anger on the right, and that anger isn't matched by enthusiasm on the left," said Dean Debnam, president of Public Policy Polling. "So the emotion is on the side of the far right. And voting has become very emotional."....
"There's real anger on the right, and that anger isn't matched by enthusiasm on the left," said Dean Debnam, president of Public Policy Polling. "So the emotion is on the side of the far right. And voting has become very emotional."....
And that is probably one of the scariest things to come out of recent presidential elections...
incarcerated
10-26-2009, 04:13
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/26/glimmering-new-dawn-for-the-gop/#
Glimmering new dawn for the GOP
Monday, October 26, 2009
By Donald Lambro
This may be the age of Barack Obama, but not for the Democratic Party.
Republicans are leading in next month's governorship races in Virginia and New Jersey. Senate Democrats, including Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, are in deep trouble in at least half a dozen races in 2010, and virtually every independent campaign tracker now says the Republican Party will pick up Democratic seats in the House next year.
Some voter polls show Republican identification has shrunk, but generic congressional preference surveys show the party is now virtually tied with the Democrats on who should control Congress.
Fundraising is a critical sign of a party's political health, and here, too, the Republican Party is winning the money race. The Republican National Committee, the party's campaign arm, raised nearly $9 million last month, with average contributions of $36, compared to the Democratic National Committee's $8 million.
Notably, Republicans are outraising Democrats in a number of Senate contests....
Glimmering new dawn for the GOP
Monday, October 26, 2009
By Donald Lambro
This may be the age of Barack Obama, but not for the Democratic Party. ....
Have no fear - the Republicans will be able to shoot themselves in the foot. Just look at the NY 23 race.
The key point in that special election coming up next week was there was no primary. It was a caucus of the Republican Leadership in the 11 counties making up the district. Dede the lib got 45% of the vote while the two conservatives split 55%. They were going to decide which one was going to drop out so the other could go head to head with Dede. Thats when Dede's friend went against her county's wishes and switched her vote to Dede and put her over the top.
In a Safe Republican District you now have the D at 35%, The lib R at 29% and the C at 23%. A little under 13% are undecided.
And that is probably one of the scariest things to come out of recent presidential elections...IIRC, 1856 and 1860 set the mark for emotional presidential elections. By way of comparison, last year's rancor did not even rival the fury of 1912 or 1960. YMMV.
Ret10Echo
11-03-2009, 19:27
McDonnell wins in Virginia, NJ too close to call
November 3, 2009 - 8:20pm
By LIZ SIDOTI
AP National Political Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Republicans wrested political control of Virginia from the Democrats on Tuesday and New Jersey's unpopular Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine was fighting for his political life as independent voters swung behind the GOP in both states. It was a troubling sign for President Barack Obama and his party heading into an important midterm election year.
Republican Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell's victory in Virginia over Democrat R. Creigh Deeds was a triumph for a GOP looking to rebuild after being booted from power in national elections in 2006 and 2008. It also was a setback for the White House in a swing state that was a crucial part of Obama's electoral landslide just a year ago.
In New Jersey, exit polls showed Corzine locked in a close race, with independents heavily favoring his Republican challenger Chris Christie in a three-way contest with independent Chris Daggett.
The president had personally campaigned for Deeds and Corzine, raising the stakes in low-energy off-year elections.
Early returns in Virginia showed that by a 2-1 margin McDonnell was winning rapidly growing, far-flung Washington, D.C., suburbs _ places like Loudoun and Prince William counties _ that Republicans historically have won but that Obama prevailed in last fall by winning over swing voters.
Democrats had won big victories in Virginia in 2006 and 2008 and consider New Jersey a stronghold.
Full story here (http://wtop.com/?nid=213&sid=1800486#)
longrange1947
11-03-2009, 22:05
Looks like they took New Jersey as well. :D
Ret10Echo
11-04-2009, 06:04
I am dropping in an article from a BBC correspondent concerning the recent election results in VA and NJ. I always find interest in what I would consider a "3rd Party" and (sort of) neutral view on topics.
In general I believe that 2010 is looming large in the eyes of incumbents in general and capital 'D' democrats in particular. Whether that translates to any stirring in the cesspool waters of DC is anyone's guess...but if the people can make these ackjasses think at least for a minute, we may be getting somewhere.
I am seriously hoping that the dim stranglehold turns into the "Black Knight" scene from Monty Python. Unfortunately, the other Congresscritters that fill the void will most likely carry on the low standards and shoddy performance of their predecessors. Perhaps the folks in the Senate and House office buildings should take a field trip down to the National Achieves for a little refresher training. It's just a few blocks away.
R10
Waiting for deliverance
Mark Mardell | 01:55 UK time, Wednesday, 4 November 2009
The turkey hunters I talked to yesterday hoped for a Republican revival and they certainly appear to have got one. As expected Republican Bob McDonnell is Virginia's next governor. Perhaps more surprisingly Chris Christie took New Jersey, even though the sitting Governor John Corzine spent millions of his own money on the campaign.
It's an unhappy anniversary present for Barack Obama, who took Virginia in the election a year ago today.
Some say these elections don't matter. And they are right that this is not a straightforward referendum on the president. But they do point to the mood in the United States. The president's allies in the liberal wing of the Democrat party think he's moving too slowly. Conservatives are furious he's gone too far. Many of both parties are reserving judgment. But of course voters can't do that, they have to make a choice.
The huntsmen I met in Virginia are a patient lot, waiting for deer or turkey that seem understandably reluctant to turn up. Sometimes they will spend all night sitting in a tree, or lying in the long grass. I don't quite go to those lengths, but sometime I feel like I, too, am hunting a rare, or perhaps even mythic, beast.
The people I want to hear from are those who voted for President Obama but have lost faith, even changed sides. After all, they will be the key to next year's mid-term elections and - looking further ahead - to whether Obama gets a second term.
Jenny, who lives in a trailer home with her husband and two little children on the outskirt of Roanoke, is one of them. Thirteen months ago, my colleague and predecessor Justin Webb interviewed them.
They said they had always been Republicans, but because of the economy, they were going to vote for Obama. They're still living in the trailer, but have scrimped and saved and are excited about moving into a house just around the corner very soon.
Jenny told me she not only voted for Obama last November, she also lost her job. And she's disillusioned with the president.
"He made everything sound good like he was just going to make everything great. And it's just not, the economy has become way worse and I would just like him to walk in my shoes for 24 hours and see how he does it."
She described what he's doing as "horrible" and thinks his plans for "equal health care" are wrong.
It's notoriously unwise to make judgements on a series of random vox pops, but whenever I am out and about, I try to ask people about this - often without a microphone or camera stuck under their nose. And I think the switcher is a pretty rare beast, if a very important one.
Exit polling in both New Jersey and Virginia indicates that a majority of those who voted thought the president is doing a good job. But asking my questions I do get a sense that they are holding the faith, rather than applauding achievements. Turnout is really important: the people at the heart of last year's Obama surge, blacks and those under 30, stayed away from the polls in droves.
These results will give Republicans a sense of enthusiasm, of momentum and may demoralise some Democrats. It may make some, up for election next year, nervous about supporting bold policies, like the public option in healthcare.
To use a New Labour phrase, Obama is in that tricky post-euphoria, pre-delivery phase.
It's even trickier if people feel deliverance never comes.
Ah yes, the trailer park outside Roanoke interview. That area has been a Democrat stronghold for a long time, don't see it changing anytime soon, too many people who want the government to do everything for them. It was nice to see that the "college" town I live in turned on their heels, just goes to show you that layoffs and furloughs can get to the only partially brain dead liberal professors (the diehards still follow the party line). Then again VT is more conservative than most universities (think Cal-Berkeley, Wisconsin, Colorado-Boulder). I'm not sure that the gubernatorial race in my half of the state was a total reflection of Obama, but rather a reflection of how the last two Dem governors (now Senator Warner and DNC chair Tim Kaine) have royally screwed up the Commonwealth's finances and cause a lot of losses from state jobs.
BigJimCalhoun
11-04-2009, 19:55
We had a county school board election yesterday. Though a non-partisan race, the school union had the candidates it supported and the Republican party had another set of candidates it supported. Those supported by the Republicans won by a large margin.:D
Slantwire
11-05-2009, 07:24
Quotes taken from here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33650641/ns/politics-washington_post).
Naturally, the White House is saying the two gubernatorial elections were too local to matter. They're only states, right?
"People went to the polls and voted on local issues, not to either register support for or opposition to the president," press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters hours after the balloting.
And yet,
"We won a congressional seat that's been in Republican hands since Ulysses S. Grant was president, in part because of the disunity in the Republican Party," Axelrod said. "That was the only truly national contest on the ballot."
So the two head-to-head state elections were too small to really matter on the national scene, but a congressional district determined by a fractured party is a "truly national contest?" Um, what?
Quotes taken from here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33650641/ns/politics-washington_post).
Naturally, the White House is saying the two gubernatorial elections were too local to matter. They're only states, right?
And yet,
So the two head-to-head state elections were too small to really matter on the national scene, but a congressional district determined by a fractured party is a "truly national contest?" Um, what?
predictable comments. O put the same formulated empty rhetoric and had his face all over the airwaves trying to mobilize the groupies to come out and support Deeds (VA) He has to distance himself from that ASAP so as not to tarnish the rockstar image.
I agree with booker, its not totally a "backlash' against O, although I don't doubt that there is some "buyers remorse" setting in amongst certain segments fo the population... but rather a clear indication that him looking pretty, sticking his chin in the air and giving a MLKesque speech doesn't have legs witing state elections. Going to make moderate D's from historically moderate areas think real hard before jumping into formation and walking lockstep with Reid and Pelosi.
Bordercop
11-05-2009, 13:50
Link: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aYEIZUXxh4Lk
House Democratic leaders, undeterred by delays in the Senate or this week’s Republican electoral triumphs, plan to call a vote Saturday on the most sweeping overhaul of U.S. health-care policy in four decades.
The House will move on the $1.05 trillion legislation that would cover 36 million uninsured people and create a government plan to compete with private insurers even after the election of Republican governors in New Jersey and Virginia. President Barack Obama will go to Capitol Hill tomorrow to meet with House Democrats, as they seek the 218 votes they need to pass the bill, a Democratic leadership aide said.
Party leaders signaled they’re ready for a debate on the legislation and a vote on its final passage by filing a 42-page amendment that made last-minute changes to the bill. The Nov. 3 filing triggered a 72-hour waiting period that Democrats pledged to give Republicans before a vote.
“It’s going to be close,” House Democratic leader Steny Hoyer told reporters today, while predicting victory. “This is a huge undertaking; there are legitimate concerns.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected claims that Democrats may have lost momentum on Election Day. “From my perspective, we won,” she said, pointing to Democratic wins in two House races to fill vacancies in California and New York.
Health-Care ‘Victory’
Pelosi, of California, said Bill Owens, the Democrat who captured a New York seat held by Republicans, called his election “a victory for health-care reform and other initiatives” of the Democratic-controlled Congress.
Investors bet that the Republican victories in the Nov. 3 gubernatorial races would bolster opposition to the overhaul, sparking a rally yesterday in health-care stocks. Health insurers Aetna Inc. of Hartford, Connecticut, and Cigna Corp. of Philadelphia both jumped 5.2 percent.
Still, Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter said the leaders planned a vote for Nov. 7, taking up the legislation before a recess next week.
The measure, which would require all Americans to get insurance, set up new online purchasing exchanges and provide subsidies to help people buy insurance, represents the biggest changes to U.S. health care since the 1965 creation of the Medicare system for the elderly.
Senate Delay
The Senate is still considering its version, and House lawmakers said they weren’t concerned about a possible delay in that chamber until early next year. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid suggested on Nov. 3 that the goal of passing a bill this year may slip.
In the past, some House Democrats voiced reluctance to move forward until the Senate was ready to act.
“That die has been cast” by Pelosi’s decision to start debate this week, said Florida Democrat Allen Boyd, a member of the Blue Dog Coalition of self-described fiscally conservative Democrats.
“I knew in August that people were concerned about the bill,” Boyd said. “Whether my feet are cold or hot” about voting without the prospect of quick Senate action “doesn’t make a whole hell of a lot of difference,” he said.
House leaders continued to seek votes from undecided Democrats, particularly those concerned that the legislation didn’t provide sufficient protection against government financing of medical care for illegal immigrants or of abortions.
Abortion Funding
Democratic leaders are seeking to preserve a ban on federal funding of abortion without affecting private insurers, said Representative Jim Langevin, a Rhode Island Democrat working to broker a agreement on the issue.
Democrats opposed to abortion, along with many Republicans, are concerned that subsidies to be offered to lower-income Americans on the health-insurance exchanges could be used to obtain abortions.
Compromise language proposed by Indiana Representative Brad Ellsworth to clarify the restrictions will be included in the legislation in the Rules Committee, said Slaughter, the chairman.
North Dakota Democrat Earl Pomeroy and other Democrats also want reassurance that undocumented aliens won’t receive subsidies for insurance. The legislation allows the immigrants to purchase private insurance with their own money on the exchange. It bars them from receiving subsidies or purchasing insurance from the public plan.
No Republican Support
Both the House and Senate plans lack any Republican support. The only Republican to vote for a health-care proposal, Maine Senator Olympia Snowe, said she can’t back the measure currently before the Senate because it includes the government insurance program. A number of Senate Democrats have also expressed concern about that so-called public option.
For Pelosi, Republican opposition is an easier hurdle to mount. Her Democratic Party now controls 258 of the 435 seats in the chamber, meaning she can lose some votes and still have the 218 needed for passage.
In the Senate, Reid faces a tougher road to passage because of Senate procedures and opposition to his plan.
Reid needs all 60 votes controlled by the Democratic caucus to even begin debate, and it isn’t certain he has them. He would then need 60 votes again to cut off debate and take a vote, amid controversies over the public option and new taxes to pay for the expanded insurance coverage for Americans.
Now, Reid is waiting for Congressional Budget Office estimates on his proposals and trying to count votes. The nonpartisan agency probably won’t finish its analysis this week, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus told reporters.
Source is here (http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=14792114).The shine coming off
Nov 4th 2009
From Economist.com
Voters punish Barack Obama and the Democrats in two states, but offer solace in New York
A YEAR after winning America's presidential election, Barack Obama and the Democrats have suffered two big defeats in governors races in Virginia and New Jersey. Last year Mr Obama won in Virginia in a particularly sweet moment for his party. This time the Republican, Bob McDonnell, trounced the Democrat, Creigh Deeds, by 59% to 41%. In northern corners of the state, which form part of Washington's suburbs and are vital to Democratic chances in statewide contests, the Republican did even better in some places, winning Loudoun county by 61% to 39% for example. In the much deeper-blue state of New Jersey, the loss was narrower for the Democrats. Chris Christie, the Republican, won with 49% of the vote, defeating Jon Corzine, the incumbent governor, who picked up around 45%.
There were also various mayoral contests on Tuesday November 3rd. In New York Michael Bloomberg won a third term, but by a much narrower margin of victory than had been expected. Mary Norwood led the field in Atlanta but faces a run-off on December 1st, which if she wins will make her the first female white mayor in the historically black city. And in Houston Annise Parker picked up 31% of the vote and faces Gene Locke in a run-off on December 12th, which if Ms Parker wins would make her the first openly gay person to be elected to the mayor's office in Texas's largest city.
The biggest drama of the night came from upstate New York where the Democrats won a special election to fill a vacancy in a congressional district. The election, in a Republican stronghold, attracted attention because of the intervention of national conservative figures, such as Sarah Palin, who urged party members to reject the official Republican candidate, whom they described as too moderate, and instead support a candidate from a rival Conservative party. The Republican candidate pulled out of the race on October 31st and then backed the Democrat, Bill Owens, who was declared the victor on Tuesday.
The significance, if any, of these off-year elections will now be debated. The Republican wins will boost party morale and make Mr Obama seem a little bit more mortal. Mr Obama's supporters point out that the governors elections were flavoured by distinctly local issues. Yet in Virginia exit polls indicated that almost a quarter of respondents said they had used their vote to register disapproval with the president (18% voted to express support for Mr Obama). The races clearly show an electoral limit to Mr Obama's star appeal. The Democratic loss in Virginia had been predicted for weeks, if not months. But in New Jersey the race had tightened considerably and Mr Obama attended two rallies for Mr Corzine over the weekend in an attempt to enthuse the Democratic faithful. His efforts came to naught.
Two broad points have emerged from this election night. The first is that the Democrats are now considered to own the economy—trying to blame George Bush for the country's economic ills, as Mr Obama tried to do in New Jersey, will not wash with swing voters. In Virginia, moderates and independents warmed to Mr McDonnell's themes of reduced taxes. The economy will doubtlessly improve before next year's mid-term elections, but Mr Obama's ambitions for government spending trouble many centrists.
The other point is that Sarah Palin’s broadside against the Republican candidate in upstate New York has established her beyond doubt as the leading player in Republican politics, much to the chagrin of party grandees. There is nothing new about conservative insurrection in the party. The contest in New York is somewhat reminiscent of Pat Buchanan's rebellion against the party establishment in the New Hampshire primary in 1992, except that conservatives have ditched their pitchforks for iPhones. But the danger for the Republicans remains the same now as then; the pursuit of an ideologically pure conservatism will turn away moderates and independents. The Republicans lost the 1992 presidential election, and they lost the 23rd congressional district in upstate New York on Tuesday.
incarcerated
11-06-2009, 02:24
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704013004574517924229019190.html
Hello, Tipping Point
The Obama presidency was always a race against time.
NOVEMBER 5, 2009, 10:42 P.M. ET
By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
'We don't look at either of these gubernatorial races . . . as something that portends a lot for our legislative efforts," insisted White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on Tuesday, as New Jersey and Virginia voters gave Democrats a thumping. Unfortunately for the White House, its opinion no longer counts.
On Jan. 20, Barack Obama began a race against time. The White House knew its liberal agenda would prove unpopular in many parts of the country represented by Democrats. So long as the president looked strong, those Blue Dogs and freshmen and swing-state senators would stick. Show them any sign of weakness, however, and rattled Dems would begin to care more about their own re-elections than they did their president.
Tuesday, the White House hit that tipping point.
To understand why, join some of those "nervous Democrats" who at this very moment are digging into, say, Virginia's returns. Last year, Dems captured three GOP House seats in the Old Dominion as the state voted for its first Democratic president since 1964. This week, those very same districts provided Democrats their first proof that the Obama agenda is a liability.
There's freshman Rep. Tom Perriello, who, buoyed by the big Obama turnout, won Virginia's fifth congressional district by a scant 727 votes. Today, Mr. Perriello's farming and manufacturing area sports the state's highest unemployment rate. The Democrat suffered a furious backlash over his vote for a cap-and-trade bill that will further crush local manufacturing and was then walloped at a series of health-care town halls.
Voters took their frustration to the polls on Tuesday. Republican Bob McDonnell, who campaigned for governor on jobs and against ObamaCare and climate legislation, took 61.4% of the district's vote. At the local level, Democrats challenged two incumbent GOP Virginia delegates; the Republicans each won by more than 30 points. The GOP last month succeeded in recruiting veteran state Sen. Robert Hurt, a district native, to challenge Mr. Perriello. He's already campaigning on jobs.
Or take Rep. Glenn Nye, who last year won Virginia's Hampton Roads district. Criticized as an outsider with few ties to the local military culture, Mr. Nye nonetheless benefited from Mr. Obama's fierce campaign for the district (which the president won with 50.5%). Yet residents are today anxious about the Democratic commitment to defense spending, and bitter about a Washington proposal to move the Navy's newest aircraft carrier from Virginia to Florida. Mr. Nye was wary enough to buck his party's leadership and vote against cap and trade, though he then got caught lauding the bill's passage.
Mr. McDonnell carried Mr. Nye's district by a 24-point margin. Locally, Republicans ousted two incumbent Democratic delegates. Mr. Nye already faces two GOP challengers—both veterans—who, combined, have $400,000 in the bank.
Gerry Connolly? The freshman Democrat last year won the 11th congressional district, a Northern Virginia suburb of Washington that has trended blue. Mr. Obama cleaned up 57% of voters, and the district was hailed as an example of a new tide toward Democrats. Mr. Connolly, feeling safe, has supported every aspect of the Democratic agenda, from stimulus to health care.
Tuesday, those suburban voters came swinging back. Mr. McDonnell won 55% of the vote, improving John McCain's number by 13 points. Two more Democratic incumbents on the local ballot went down to GOP contenders. Local businessman Keith Fimian has already announced a rematch against Mr. Connolly; he outraised him by $100,000 in his first fund-raising quarter.
Forget the freshmen—how about Virginia's ninth district, home to 27-year-incumbent Rick Boucher? That's coal country, though Mr. Boucher, confident in incumbency, has been playing a dangerous game of shepherding through his party's climate bill. Will Morefield, a little-known Republican running for the Virginia House of Delegates, centered his campaign against that legislation. He beat the Democratic incumbent by 14 points. Mr. McDonnell? He won a devastating 66% of the district vote.
These are the numbers the 49 Democrats who sit in McCain districts are dissecting. The mass defection in the independent vote, the uptick in the angry-senior vote, the swing in suburban voters, the drop-off in Democratic turnout—the figures have even hot incumbent blood running cold. The White House can shout that this is not a referendum on the president's policies. What vulnerable Democrat wants to take that chance?
The White House and the congressional leadership saw this coming, and it is why Speaker Nancy Pelosi is force-marching her health bill to a vote tomorrow. She's not about to give her members time to absorb the ugly results, or to be further rattled by next week's Veteran's Day break, when they go home for a repeat of the August furies. If not now, she knows, maybe never.
Look for it, nonetheless, to be a squeaker. A lot of Democrats are getting a sneaky suspicion Mrs. Pelosi is willing to sacrifice their seats on the altar of liberal government health care. Combined with the election results and Mr. Obama's falling poll numbers, this is no recipe for loyalty. Hello, tipping point. Hello, even crazier Washington.
Write to kim@wsj.com .
The Reaper
11-06-2009, 08:49
The economy will doubtlessly improve before next year's mid-term elections....
I can't believe that anyone allowed to write for publication is allowed to make a blanket statement like that.
TR
They don't care...
I guess maybe not. I still think that if they don't care now, they will definatly care later.
I can't believe that anyone allowed to write for publication is allowed to make a blanket statement like that.
TRFWIW, I noticed the blanket statement as well. My take is that The Economist believes that the worst is over. The statement is therefore consistent with the newspaper's view. That being said, someone would have been wise to pick a different adverb.
Moreover, in the context of other pieces on the current administration, my take is that The Economist is increasingly impatient with the president. By saying "doubtlessly the economy will improve," the paper may be underscoring the point that the president cannot blame the problems he "inherited" on Bush the Younger for much longer.
YMMV.