John Cole has an impressive rant describing how a bill just about everybody likes could flame out, die and cause political wreckage through a combination of political nihilism and the right wing media/thinktank wurlitzer.
For some reason, it reminds me of the Subgenius rant “Hateword” by Nenslo.
I think the media did a huge disservice to the left in its fawning coverage of the Obama election and inauguration. One got the sense in viewing and reading that Obama won a landslide, which he did not. That is telling in that the Republican brand had a million self-inflicted wounds prior to the election, and McCain was a positively uninspiring candidate. But to view the media, one would have thought that Obama had a mandate. I think the President may have initially been caught up in it as well.
The members of Congress seem to know otherwise. They aren’t just running with the Obama agenda, because they know there is no mandate.
“A bill everybody likes”? Show me that bill. This isn’t political nihilism. It’s realism.
Oh, Praise “Bob”!
Mike,
Your mandate argument isn’t supported by facts. Obama had the highest percentage of the popular vote since Bush I in 1988.
The second problem is that the idea of a Presidential mandate is bunk to begin with. Reagan won in 1980 with barely over 50% (50.75%) of the popular vote. Against, as you call it, an uninspiring candidate. Even his electoral landslide in 1984 was supported with just 58.77% of the popular vote. From 1980 to 1984, a tremendous amount of legislation was passed working with a Democratic House, without this mythical mandate.
I don’t think you can argue at all that the R’s in the Senate are being anything but obstructionist. I am confident that the American people do not want blanket holds placed on 70+ nominees with the stated purpose of getting military projects funded in Alabama. It is an abuse of the intent of Senate rules.
And to imbue any Congress, Democratic or Republican with some sort of connection to the American people that nobody else sees is giving them far more intellectual credit than I am willing to.
I don’t see the media having created the fawning,but rather reflecting the fawning over Obama by huge numbers of people.His election still is ‘a miracle’,and granted, with all conditions falling in place to pull him through. The fawning is over now,even by his ardent supporters, because the country is in a mess,and there’s a general angry at everyone in office,and fawning people expect miracles to come. I think the disappointment is ,for many supporters, that Obama wasn’t a progressive idealogue although he is still often protrayed as such by conservative idealogues..He tried to let Congressional Dems develop legislation. So far the stealth weapon against Obama has been the so-called ‘moderate Democrats’.And Rich McConnel and Boehner seems to have as much power as Obama,and it just doesnt set right. Alas,Obama surely is not the leader Reagan was!
But voting for Obama in pre-voting long lines in Florida where I voted was an awesome experience.I stood in line about 3 hours in a line winding around the public library. In line were whole families with strollers and picknick food and water,with grandmothers and cousins and neighbors all together. .The huge majority were Hispanic and Black.They wanted to pre-vote so their vote wouldn’t be thrown out ,one of them told me.(Im not sure why pre-votes were considered more likely counted than election day votes,but Ive heard others say that,and that’s a perception).I stood in line just for the once- in- a-lifetime experience. I’d guess most of these people never voted before,because they saw no reason.Obama was the reason.
Look, I’m an old gray-haired guy with trifocals with prisms and I havent been carried away with any candidate since Barry Goldwater,but I was different then and times were different then.An obvious black guy ,who people knew was ‘liberal’ ,elected president.? ..Not the USA I grew up in..!
It’s an experience I will never forget.Sure It was emotional and irrational,but thats what grass roots adoration is. It was America’s forgotten grassroots coming awake and I dont mean to be too dramatic and partisan. It will be interesting to see if there is any kind of turn out like that in 2012. I would guess the fawning part is over..
obama had 365 electoral votes. how is that not a landslide?
I’m dizzy from the spin!
If Obama has a mandate, and the Republican Senators, obstructionist though they may be, only now total 40, then every single piece of legislation Obama wants passed should sail through. Sail. I mean, sail.
As Lou points out, Democratic legislators have not been getting on board. So, if Obama can’t get the lawmakers of his own party on board, having majority enough in both houses to get virtually anything through, why is that? What is the resistance? What are the Democratic legislators afraid of? Are they afraid of not being re-elected if they get on board?
What does all of this tell you? It tells me ‘No Mandate’. It may also say ‘Not Strong Leader’ as Lou points out. Or, as my friend Larry, an Obama supporter complains, “The Republicans now have a 40-60 majority in the Senate”.
Hopefully Obama’s next years will be more resembling enlightened liberalism than chaotic democracy. He is the only person who has the power to change the others. For the good of the country I hope he is successful.
Hopefully the term ‘free market’ will go back to the original concept of shared responsibility and benefit.
“What are the Democratic legislators afraid of? Are they afraid of not being re-elected if they get on board”
Yes.
But they have to realize that they may also not be re-elected if they don’t get on board. Failure paints with a broad brush.
mike, if you’re dizzy from the spin, then you should stop spinning.
first you asserted that obama didn’t win “a landslide”. when it was pointed out that by any reasonable metric, he did win a landslide, you move the goalposts to the more ephemeral “mandate”.
as for why obama’s agenda has struggled in congress, everyone who’s been paying attention to the senate knows that the republicans have taken obstructionism to new levels, threatening to filibuster pretty much every bill that comes down the pike. as such, every piece of legislation now requires 60 votes, which was difficult to muster even when the dems had 60 members in their caucus. furthermore, even if dems can break a filibuster, it takes 2-3 days to schedule a cloture vote… and that’s for each bill.
now, i’d agree that the dems in congress haven’t been nearly as aggressive as they should be, and obama shares some blame there. but to pretend that their failure to pass obama’s agenda is solely because of his failure to lead is to ignore what’s actually going on in washington.