We've been hearing a lot these last few days about a detailed, specific, and meaningful "package" (hate that word) that Obama is going to propose shortly after Labor Day.  Nobody knows what he's talking about, but that's not really the point.  Simultaneously, the White House is leaking to sympathetic media sources the fact that Obama plans to pull a Harry Truman and run for reelection with a "do-nothing Congress" as his foil.  The assumption seems to be:  "I already know that whatever I propose, it's not going anywhere with Republicans running the House, so I'm going to campaign on these great ideas and against Republican obstructionism."

I have a couple of questions for everybody.  First, do you know of any jobs legislation that he has proposed (since Republicans took over the House) that has been shot down?  I don't.  Seems to me he is talking about prospective obstructionism.  Second, it almost appears that he is hoping for obstructionism.  Will a Republican House not act on a good idea (let's suspend disbelief and assume he actually might have a good idea) that's consistent with its principles and goals?  I wouldn't assume that.  Boehner wants to get things done, not just say "no". 

Obama strikes me, at present, as someone who is desperately grasping for a plan, and a story line, and some kind of narrow path to reelection.  Now he thinks he can run against Congress.  But what if Congress doesn't "cooperate" with the game plan? 

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Pilgrim
Joined
Jun '10
Pilgrim

Any plan the President proposes is going to have a LOT of spending in it.  The House Republicans will not approve spending. <period  The President will campaign to demonize Republicans for obstructing "job creation," the Republicans will campaign against the President's insatiable appetite for spending. Somebody has somebody in a box, but I am CoC-ed if I know who.

Paul A. Rahe

His game is to run against Washington. That is what he did in 2008, and he is not averse to repeating himself.

Michael Hussey
Joined
Mar '11
Michael Hussey
Paul A. Rahe: His game is to run against Washington. That is what he did in 2008, and he is not averse to repeating himself. · Aug 17 at 10:54am

Paul, has anyone done that successfully more than once?  I just don't know who would buy it at this point.  Call me naive.

Dan Hanson
Joined
Aug '10
Dan Hanson

This is his best strategy, because it allows him to make vague claims about alternatives without showing the numbers or alienating any special interest groups.

For example, notice how the debate over the debt has been framed.  It's attacking specific Republican proposals, while the Democrat alternative is merely 'a balanced approach' which sounds nice and reasonable and doesn't offend anyone.

The reality:  The Democrat's proposal is to rescind the Bush tax cuts on those making over $250,000 per year.  By their own math, this will result in a revenue increase of $69 billion dollars per year.

The deficit is projected to grow by about 8-9 trillion dollars over the next ten years.  So if you want to balance the budget under the Republican's 'draconian' plan, you'd have to cut an average of 800-900 billion dollars per year.  Under the Democrat's 'balanced' plan, you raise taxes on the rich - and then you 'only' have to cut about 730-830 billion per year. 

They can't admit that their tax plan only recovers a tiny fraction of the deficit.  So they're ecstatic about changing the debate to one about 'balance vs extremism.'

David Nordmark
Joined
Nov '10
David Nordmark

I just don't think this will work. In order for it to be believable he would have to show examples of leadership where he's actually put forward plans that have been thwarted. Putting together a budget that isn't laughed at or a deficit plan that can actually be scored by the CBO would be a good start. I think far too many Americans now see him for what he really is - a media creation with no leadership skills whatsoever.

Lady Bertrum
Joined
Apr '11
Lady Bertrum

 Obama is always the "new" ...someone.  Remember the new Lincoln?  The new FDR?  The new Reagan?

Unfortunately, We (and he) and are really stuck with the old Obama.

Lady Bertrum
Joined
Apr '11
Lady Bertrum

 Obama is always the "new" ...someone.  Remember the new Lincoln?  The new FDR?  The new Reagan?

Unfortunately, We (and he) and are really stuck with the old Obama.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In