...Americans needed their president to tell them a story that made sense of what they had just been through, what caused it, and how it was going to end. They needed to hear that he understood what they were feeling, that he would track down those responsible for their pain and suffering, and that he would restore order and safety.
I know that the President has recognized that he immersed himself too much in the sausage-making process of getting health care reform done during his first two years and neglected to communicate often and clearly enough with voters during that time. But as I've pointed out before, during this last round about the debt ceiling, he gave 10 speeches/press conferences in one month - some of which were very compelling.
The trouble is, as Ezra Klein pointed out a while ago, no one listens to the President. But that's not just a problem in our politics. I run a small non-profit and part of my job is public relations. I know this challenge well. We mail out materials, have a web site, are on Face Book and do everything we can to tell our story. Overall, do the majority of people in our community pay attention...no.
We are all flooded these days with access to information. And most of the time, we ignore it because its just too much to absorb. When it comes to the news of the day, most of us political junkies turn to sources that confirm our own biases...be it on the left or the right. For those without that inclination, they want summaries and mostly get stories of the false equivalency variety from the MSM. This leads to the American public being sorted into 3 general categories: left, right, and a pox on both your houses.
This is the media world in which we live today. And its different than how politics has been conducted in the past. Its time we all recognized the reality and started to come up with solutions. That's because our current environment plays right into the hands of the GOP. The pox on both your houses crowd is their ace in the hole. We know in poll after poll that most Americans agree with Democratic solutions. But they're disgusted with the political gamesmanship they see going on in Washington and are constantly fed the idea that both sides do it.
Taking this on is exactly what President Obama is trying to do. Its where his passion lies. That's why I think Andrew Sullivan's response to Westen is so spot-on.
What Westen seems to have wanted was the Democratic version of George W. Bush, contemptuous of his opponents, ruthless in his often unconstitutional determination to get his agenda through, divisive and polarizing. But Obama would not have won election on those grounds and did not have a mandate for that. He was elected as a moderate Democrat, prepared to engage any pragmatic solution to obvious problems, while not splitting an already polarized country even further.
That he has tried to do, against an opposition party that decided to double down on polarization, on politics as warfare, on politics as a game, and bereft of any ideas except taking us back to before the New Deal. What has to be defeated is not just their agenda, but their modus operandi. Only by patiently out-lasting and out-arguing them will Obama be able to do this. And it says a lot about the utopian left that they do not see the wisdom and responsibility of this strategy.
Very good though. He probably does not have time to change their MO. I am not sure if there was a path to victory.
ReplyDeleteTime to change their MO?
ReplyDeleteI don't know either.
But its typical of his "long game" style to try.
Mo'nin', Ms. Pants
ReplyDeleteI just got finished putting in my two cents on Jack White's FB page to this BO-RING Westin piece. I see it as yet aNOTHer "Obama is a punk" piece.
And, one of the things that I said is that I'm gettin' REALLY tired of yet another white guy tellin' me, by proxy, how I'm supposed to act.
Krugman does this crap, too. Lonnnnnng on critique, quiiiiiiiite short on, then, tellin' him what he should do such that he's able to get whatever it is through BOTH Houses of Congress.
And, the Left helps the Right out by chewin' on his butt.
WHERE was this "weak" charge for Bill - DADT - I COULDN'T EVEN GET HEALTH CARE OUT OF THE GATE - Clinton????
Ronald Reagan had NINE of his vetoes overturned. NINE.
Our side said a LOT of well deserved things about him, but callin' him weak isn't one of them.
You say this time and again (and as I've mentioned, you are gonna have to keep on saying this)....it's not Obama that needs to buck up.
It's US.
You know what I do with folks like Westen who are so determined to commit psychobabble criticisms of Obama?
ReplyDeleteI assume massive amounts of projection.
Nuff said on the (small) dick-swinger. LOL
I continue to believe progressives have a credible case to make against the president.
ReplyDeleteHow so? WTF is this ish?
Progressives can go straight to the hottest hell and take that Westen’s piece with them!
I know this is a little off topic, but I think I may understand why Obama went after healthcare.
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned it briefly and I have commented on it before.
I am pretty sure it was because it was the most unreachable target. It was an enemy that every president claims they will conquer and one that has defeated anyone who dared try, even the almighty Clinton Dynasty. The economy always helps itself eventually. The difference a president can make to the economy of a nation that is largely at the mercy of global forces is not easily gauged or understood. The ability to pass universal healthcare of any worthwhile kind required a democratic congress and a democratic White House. This is something we may not see again for decades. Obama went after the most challenging target while he had the ammunition to take it out. The cost to America for getting this done: pay less attention to the most pressing needs of America in the short term (which happens to be dire economic problems). The cost to Obama for doing this: willfully turn over the legislature to the Republicans. It’s called a gambit in chess.
I was angry after the "solution" to the debt crisis, but now I think I may not be fair. I think Obama has a very long term view and calculates many moves ahead of everyone else. He may win or lose the game, but I am starting to feel that win or lose, the game he is playing is something most of us cannot fairly judge. It is way over most of our heads. We are looking at the next move, and perhaps the one after that.
To Obama, it may be possible that those moves are mostly irrelevant. He sees a larger game.