Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

Today's news for me is not Obama's new costume or new CBS poll numbers. It is the news on inflation. Apparently inflation at the wholesale level jumped 1 percent in January. It's highest in 26 years. 1% in a MONTH!

People talk about recessions and how the economy is going to be tougher in coming years (if not decades) for the US. So far Obama used the economic crisis to point out the obvious reason for it, Bush. However, blaming Bush does not solve the problem. Hope? I don't think so. Frankly, in the global market, they couldn't care less whether the US is hopeful or not. At the end of the day, I think economy will be the issue in the general election. It could be great for the Dem. if we elect Hillary not Obama. I am cautiously predicting that Obama might loose the debate over economy to McCain. Here is a glimpse of how little the market care about "HOPE" and...Obama.

I guess people in Blogsphere do not watch any financial channels because I can not recall a single occasion when people became outraged by comments made in CNBC or Bloomberg News. They have been effectively dismissing BOTH Clinton and Obama for a while. Of course, Hillary is the main target, though.

It is irony to see the difference between CNBC and MSNBC. While MSNBC has been Obamania for months, CNBC constantly has laughed at him. Honestly I think they DO NOT believe that OBAMA could win the general election. He is a laughing stock over there. Unfortunately I think CNBC is closer to the true NBC spirit, a media outlet owned by a big corporation. Then why financial channels dismiss Obama? because they can easily argue that he does not have any plan or experience big enough to handle this nation's terrible economy. They at least feel Hillary as a threat but Obama? They are about to call him Obambi.

The other day at Kudlow & Company, one panellist talked about the most possible scenario; McCain as president with the Congress dominated by the democrats. I was puzzled by how confident they were. Yes. They are mostly conservatives. Yes, they are pro-corporations. Yes. I know. Unfortunately, THEY are the voice of the corporate America. If Obama had been scrutinized by the media and his so-called momentum is built on his plans not on personalities, I would laugh at CNBC back. However, because of the discrepancy between MSNBC and CNBC, I can not stop thinking that all the hype for Obama is carefully scripted.  

One more interesting note, they think the surge of Obama is not about Obama. It is all about anti-Hillary. And they pointed out Hillary is THE liberal. I guess they know better than many democrats. What an irony. Watch yourself.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=65 1246405

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=66 4042559

Tags: clinton, economic crisis, obama (all tags)

Comments

30 Comments

Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

This is the same crowd that said that Clinton couldn't win a Senate seat in New York.  

Why do you trust their political analysis now?

by mainelib 2008-02-26 06:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

Killing the messenger would not do the work. Yes. They hate Hillary. They are already calling Hillary is OVER...like many Obama supporters. Notice the difference between MSNBC and CNBC. Isn't it at least  intriguing?

by praxis1 2008-02-26 06:26AM | 0 recs
True

But there's a huge difference between a Democrat winning in a heavily Democratic state, and a Democrat winning a split nation.

by Montague 2008-02-26 08:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

I entirely agree that Iraq will not be the big issue this election - when the dollar is weak against the Canadian dollar, there's a problem.  Only 3 years ago when I was last in Canada, the dollar was still pretty strong.  Inflation needs to be controlled before it drives us into an even worse position.  Can Obama deliver what on is usually a Republican monopoly?

by ejintx 2008-02-26 06:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

Yes. That's what I worry the most.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 06:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

It might be the smartest or dumbest move he/she makes, but if Obama or Clinton borrows some Ron Paul talking points and gets rid of Paul's linguistic choices, it might make an effective argument against McCain.

For example instead of, "No empire has ever lasted that spends this much on defense" use "America cannot go on supporting an unjustified war that reeks nothing but havoc on our economy and ensures that the longer we stay there, the more we will pay for it."

It's like two birds with one stone.

by ejintx 2008-02-26 06:46AM | 0 recs
CNBC?

Aren't they a parody channel?

CNBC is basically a whole bunch of screamers crying because their day trader buddy speculators are going belly-up because the gravy train has ended.

CNBC is about on par with the Yahoo market message boards... a whole lot of screamers and screechers who demonstrate an unflinching ability to deceitfully trumpet their own, selfish wants at the cost of greater fiscal sanity and national economic health.

by zonk 2008-02-26 06:27AM | 0 recs
Re: CNBC?

Whether you like it or not, they represent a very strong part of this country. Whether you prove or not, if economy becomes an issue, they will be the most effective tool for republicans. If we are seriously about winning the general election, how could we ignore this wing of the country? The primaries are not the end of the game. They are just beginning of the game.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 06:33AM | 0 recs
Re: CNBC?

I've seen CNBC's ratings... their viewership is simply not a voting constituency worth worrying about.

by zonk 2008-02-26 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: CNBC?

However, all the market analysts watch it. They are number one financial channel in this country. They do not target general audience. So, the absolute number of viewers does not matter that much.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: CNBC?

I know a fair number of financial industry insiders... Investment Bank VPs... Fund managers... etc -- they don't pay much mind to CNBC, or really, any of the teevee financial news.  They're more the wonky types that feel complex financial matters don't lend themselves to cable teevee.

by zonk 2008-02-26 07:01AM | 0 recs
Re: CNBC?

Believe what you want to believe. Just let me tell you this. The success of CNBC triggered CNN and FOX to launch their own financial channels.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 07:06AM | 0 recs
Re: CNBC?

their viewership is simply not a voting constituency worth worrying about.
---------------------------------------- --

hell, I don't think their viewership even believes what cnbc says.

by soros 2008-02-26 07:55AM | 0 recs
Re: CNBC?
Most polls now show that a majority think the Dems are better on the economy than the Repubs.
by PhilFR 2008-02-26 08:19AM | 0 recs
Re: CNBC?

That does not mean that they would think Obama is better than McCain. As I wrote in the diary, all the great thing Dems can do can happen with Democratic congress. Not the presidency. They fear Democratic presidencty + Democratic congress. Probably that's why they hate Hillary so much.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 08:38AM | 0 recs
So not one substantive reason

as to why John McCain will win the battle about the economy with Barack Obama.  No comparison of their economic proposals (though McCain really doesn't have any that aren't Bush 3.0).  What a worthless diary.

by bigdcdem 2008-02-26 06:33AM | 0 recs
Re: So not one substantive reason

I am flattered to be called an author of a worthless diary by a true Obama supporter. I mean it.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 06:33AM | 0 recs
Re: So not one substantive reason

Wishful thinking does not make it happen. Look. Obama, because he so wanted to win this primary, attacked and dismissed all the possibly good economic legacies from Clinton administration. I do not agree with every economic policy happened during the Clinton administration but for the public that's that they wanted to get from Dems.

Since Obama effectively distanced himself from the Clinton administration, I do not know how he can fight against Republicans in the debate on economy. Certainly "populist" label will not fly considering ever growing deficits. He can blame Bush and War on Iraq for the disaster but blaming does not sound like solution for many.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 06:46AM | 0 recs
Re: So not one substantive reason

Oops. I wanted to post this reply to the other comment.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 07:10AM | 0 recs
Read Obama's economic proposals

and then come back and tell me how they're not better than McCain's.

by bigdcdem 2008-02-26 08:07AM | 0 recs
I noticed this yesterday as well,

don't usually watch CNBC but your diary is right on about their tone.

by Molee 2008-02-26 06:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

They are panicking because the Democratic candidates that they were hoping would show "responsibility and reason" (continue the destruction of the middle class and continue the massive transfer of wealth to them and their fat cat buddies) are adopting Edward's populist rhetoric. They were betting that Hillary at least would mark a return to the globilization friendly policies of her husband but no, even Hillary is now saying she never supported any of Bill's trade policies.

One of Kudlow's panelists made it clear. Expect less money for corporate profits and investors more money for labor. Less for the top 2%, more for the great unwashed masses if the Democrats win. They all agreed this would be a very bad thing.

Kudlow is always delusional. He was a cheerleader for the markets right before the tech bubble popped sending equities crashing, same thing with his prediction that the housing crisis would be contained and would not impact the economy and by the way according to Larry the tax cuts are working and the American middle class is doing better then ever. He is being just as delusional now in predications about November. He is the most Hacktacular pundit on Television.

by hankg 2008-02-26 06:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

It is not just Kudlow and they were not betting an Hillary. Come on. You just need to search on their site to see the tone. Hillary has been the enemy ever since she entered the race. Obama? As you can see from the clip, they like him because they THINK they can win him so easily. I do not agree with them 100% but I am sure we need to think about it.

by praxis1 2008-02-26 06:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

Early on Kudlow was calling Hillary the responsible candidate (those were his exact words). I think they believed that both Hillary and Obama could be co-opted or maybe co-opted would be to strong a word, let's say "reasonable", but Edwards populist class war rhetoric was dangerous. They are horrified that both Hillary and Obama are sounding an awful lot like Edwards in Ohio.

Both Hillary and Obama have gotten plenty of support from Wall Street. It's called the Democratic party not the Socialist party for a reason. There are plenty of successful capitalists like Warren Buffet and George Soros who understand a fair system is a more sustainable and stable system.

So in short the Club for Growth are not secret Obama fans they will go all out for McCain because of Tax policy and because they loathe all Democrats.

by hankg 2008-02-26 07:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

Wow, they really do think Obama's a joke don't they? They're pretty much reinforcing what PJ O'Rourke said that the GOP think that if Obama somehow manages to win the WH they'll be able to walk all over him.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-26 07:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

A New York Times/CBS News Poll released today shows a large majority of Democrats and Republicans agree on one thing. That Obama will be a stronger candidate against McCain. Republicans believe McCain will have a much easier time against Hillary.

All the nonsense of the Republicans wanting Obama as the Democratic candidate is a delusion that exists only in the minds of a few partisans and conspiracy theorists on myDD not supported by any credible evidence or polling anywhere.

by hankg 2008-02-26 08:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

So? That's before the GOP has unloaded on him. And Rasmussen has him behind Hillary when it comes to McCain.

Did you watch the clips? They even said "Obama is the enemy of my enemy".

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-26 09:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

I think Wall Street is actually quite interested in seeing a Democrat win this year.  They'll never be in the tank for a Dem like they usually are for the GOP, of course, but a lot of the big financial players see a new direction as an important part of restoring investor confidence and getting the economy back on track, which is what puts money in their pockets.

As between Hillary and Obama, they seem totally indifferent from where I sit (which, on most days, is 1 block from Wall Street).

The hacks like Kudlow will always be hacks, of course, but the guys who actually call the shots on Wall Street are quite intrigued by the Dems at the moment.  The scam is that they don't think the Dems will do anything serious in terms of re-regulating the market, but as long as people THINK the market is getting re-regulated, they'll be happy to invest their money into whatever the new pile o' crap might happen to be.

by Steve M 2008-02-26 07:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

Outside of Kudlow world most of Wall Street is clamoring for Fed intervention and regulation to straighten out the huge mess created by lack of reasonable oversight and regulation under Bush.

Wall Street is hilarious when the market is going in their direction they are libertarian free marketeers, but when the crap hits the fan they turn overnight into quasi-socialists screaming for a government bailout.

by hankg 2008-02-26 08:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting tone from CNBC about Obama

All the wonderful things the Wall Street expect from Dems can happen with Democtratic Congress with McCain presidency. As I pointed out in the diary, they do not object democtrats rulling the congress.

By the way, how come NOBODY is discussing the discrepancy between CNBC and MSNBC???

by praxis1 2008-02-26 08:40AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------