The Obama presidency has ended.

 

.

Eccentric Observer

Old Dominion Tory

 

.

.

It's over.

The Obama Presidency has ended.  There were indications that it was hastening to its conclusion late last year.  The November election results were, of course, the most apparent indication.  All the talk of the “Comeback Kid” was mere wishful thinking; with the Democrats’ strong majorities in the House and the Senate, passage of the repeal of “Don’t Ask. Don’t Tell,” for example, was a foregone conclusion. Presidential  bravado only briefly masked the fact that the exodus of senior staff from the White House continued apace.  While the span of a political appointee’s service usually is between eighteen and twenty-four months, senior White House personnel, who often have something of a personal tie to a President, tend to stay through the first term at least.

With the presentation of Barack Obama’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2012, however, he made it clear that, apart from the inescapable demands of national security and foreign policy, his Administration has given up governing. The Second Obama Campaign has begun.

As many editorialists and commentators have observed, the timidity of the President’s budget indicates that the President and his campaign staff (for that is the true status of the White House staff) are trying to use the coming budget battle to gain political advantage.  Absent any real leadership on the issue on the President’s part and goaded by an energetic freshman class, the Administration hopes, the Congressional Republicans will dash into the fray with all sorts of unpopular spending "cuts" and—dream of dreams—ideas about reforming the major entitlements of Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.  As soon as that happens, the Obama White House will follow the script of the Clinton White House. They will accuse the Republicans as being cold and heartless and cast their budget proposals as direct assaults on the poor, the elderly, and, yes, the children as well as gravely damaging to the economic recovery.  As in the 1990s, the GOP will be on the back foot, and the Democrat in the White House will sail on to an easy reelection.

For this plan to succeed, however, all of the players must adhere to their assigned roles, especially the press and the public. The press must do as they have done in the past, reporting about the misery that will be caused by these "cuts" and commenting approvingly on the President's political shrewdness. The public, too, must do as they did in the past: recoil with horror at the intransigence of Republicans and the cruelty that underpins it and then flock to the President's support.

Indications abound, however, that these players and others may not be willing to adhere to the script. The initial support of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was tepid, and the House Democrats who went on the air to root for the President seemed to be going through their talking points unenthusiastically.  The Washington Post editorial board was distinctly underwhelmed, and even some commentators on—GULP!—MSNBC criticized the President for a lack of leadership.  In recent polls, the ratio of people who disapprove of the President's leadership on the budget to those who approve routinely hovers around three to one.

Just as potentially disruptive to the well-laid plans of the Second Obama Campaign, is the fact that, even if the news media realize where exactly it is their duty lies, we live in a new media environment.  While their audiences are smaller in relation to traditional media outlets, cable news, talk radio, websites, and social media can have an outsized effect in countering the narratives and refuting the agendas of traditional media.  Finally, polling figures show that controlling public spending and the national debt are high on the public agenda.

There are some who already praising the President for being politically shrewd, for luring the Republicans into a battle from which he will emerge victorious and strengthened.  Indications are, however, that the President may have outsmarted himself and, in turn, that the progress of the Second Obama Campaign will be nowhere as smooth as the progress of the first. 

 

.

.

 

Comments

[Crackie]

Very interesting observations, but I must admit it does not feel as if it is over. To be really really over, President Obama would need to look like Franklin Pierce in 1855--not even going to be renominated by his own party. (Many Obama supporters I know are convinced that, if he can get unemployment below 8%, President Obama can coast to reelection.) Of course, Franklin Pierce bided his dwindling time as a one term president reducing the natioanl debt by 60%. Perhpas we will see a reverse-Pierce.

[Mr. P]

With all due respect I can't agree, Crackie. People are sometimes smarter than they look. And most people can see a man who praises the protesters in other countries, while dismissing those in his own country "teabaggers". The people, as a general rule, don't like being dismissed. And it's one of the great aspects of the Tea Party that they really don't have a leader; there is no face Obama and his press corps can attack. So when they do attack they are attacking the people directly. Yeah, everyone should have seen what he was with his "bitter clinger" and "spread the wealth" comments, bur now we know better. His election was the result of very special circumstances that cannot be replicated. Besides, he has not come through on his major promises (closing Gitmo, withdrawal, etc.) and has even had to turn to the once vilified General Petraeus to conduct the war he promised to end.

Also, never forget how many of the people have lost their retirements. We can't forget that because we're among them. Folks have lost the padding against fate that money provides; the vacations, the right schools, etc. So many people have lost so many privileges they once took for granted--and Liberalism sounds a lot better when you have something to feel guilty about.

All my life Liberals have been screaming about how we're going to run out of water, or air, or oil, or land. In the end, due to them, we're just going to run out of money.

[Crackie]

Mr. P (and ODT), I am in the position of wanting to agree with you. I agree with everything you say about what has happened--people lost their savings, and the worst driver of this was the set of liberal policies (statues, regs and Fannie/Freddie)that forced and enticed financial instututions to do mass qualntities of subprime lending. The banks made money following these directives, and eventually tanked the market. But the media put 100% of the blame for this with Bush, and it is not clear to me that enough people will understand what happened and why to turn the tide. The topic at hand is who will win the presidential election of 2012--I feel strongly that, for the resons you state, Republicans will control both houses of Congress in 2013. But whoever is nominated by the Republicans will become one of the most demonized people in US history. In my opinion, it will be a close run thing, and, accordingly, I must respectfully dissent from the "Obama is over" view. Did I mention that I hope I'm wrong?

[Mr. P]

As a Jewish friend of mine used to say, "From your lips to God's ear".

Living where you live and working where you work it's probably hard to believe anyone thinks Obama is anything but perfect. Out this-a-way I find more diversity of opinion. And I do think (not know, just wishfully think) that the demonization machine going into high gear is just going to snap back in their faces. A mixed metaphor, but you get what I'm driving at. Witness Wisconsin and how every move on the Left is from the old tried and true playbook. Hey, look! The republican is being called Hitler! The talking point: Working families under assault. Those poor union folks like the one who told me on the train last week that I could make 100 grand as a bus driver ("and not even have a college education, isn't that great?"). That sort of stuff plays well when your audience has nice little nest eggs all tucked away for braces and college and retirement. Not so well when it looks like I'm going to be working till the day I die and that death will probably come via a bullet to the back of the head in an open field, delivered care of a Healthcare Commissar who has deemed me no longer viable as an economic unit and therefore a burden to the Glorious State.

You hope you're wrong. I hope I'm wrong, too (about that commissar). But I do hope I'm right about the rest of it.

[Crackie]

Mr. P, we have to stop cheering each other up this way. More such cheering up and we are undone.

[Old Dominion Tory]

Gents (and all): Will Barack Obama be reelected in 2012? There is a good chance that the answer is "Yes." Ousting a sitting President, even one who is damaged politically, is no easy task. Just ask the ghost of Ted Kennedy now haunting the Senate cloakrooms.
Barack Obama & Company apparently aren't willing to take that chance, however. They have, therefore, decided to begin the Second Campaign.
In a way, it is hardly surprising. The first duty of a politician is to attend to his or her reelection, and Obama & Co. are politicians, first and foremost.
However, I think there is a little more to it. I think there is in all this a desire to recapture that "lightning in a bottle" moment that existed between the 2004 Democratic National Convention and Inauguaration Day 2009. It must have been a magical time for them. How exhilirating it must have been to accompany a shallow, self-absorbed machine pol as he rode a wave of baseless adulation from the press and commentariat to the highest office in the land. Gaffes were forgiven, concerns about long-term relationships with dodgy people were overwhelmed by the weakest platitudes, the Democratic Establishment and its favored candidate were brought to heel, the Republicans were derided and then defeated. Nothing could go wrong.
Moreover, there were none of the onerous responsibilities of governing with which to attend. No need to fight a war, write a budget, fight for legislation. Just lay back, let the press do the job it most enthusiastically tucked into, and coast into office amid talk of a new Liberal Ascendancy that would last for decades. It was all cloudless glory.

[john]

Your fuckin stupid

[S. Petersen]

March 4: Did you give up blogging for the 'gesismas? I miss your thoughts and wit.

[Mrs. P]

Thank you S. Peterson.

No, I have not given it up blogging. Just taking a break to hone some cooking (and writing) skills. I shall return soon to have more fun. Until then...

[Socorro Sultan]

let's just do what is the best. it's for us anyway

[Conan]

Great Sultan, Indeed yes. But then we must consider: what is best in life?
"To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women."