Obama Fatigue?

[djAdvocate]

i respect this guy.  he is no Obama fan, but i think this critique is close to the mark.  Obama has this sort of tone-deafness when it comes to the finer points of playing politics and seeking advice.  it really hurts him in a sensitive situation like Bergdahl.  any Democrats agree:

www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/i-ve-had-enough-when-democrats-quit-on-obama-20140609



The email hit my in-box at 9:41 p.m. last Wednesday. From one of the most powerful Democrats in Washington, a close adviser to the White House, the missive amounted to an electronic eye roll. "Even I have had enough."

Another Democrat had quit on President Obama.

The tipping point for this person was the Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl case—not the soldier-for-Taliban swap itself as much as how the White House mishandled its obligation to communicate effectively and honestly to Congress and the public. More than that, Obama's team had failed once again to acknowledge its mistakes, preferring to cast blame and seek cover behind talking points.

"DC is hard, and depressing," the Democrat wrote. "I still believe good comes from government (e.g. 8 million in ACA). But that Politico story is a cautionary one: good reminder that you can't go so in the bunker [and] no longer identify legitimate criticism."

[dondub]

I had Obama fatigue by Feb. 2010 and I voted for him, just that once, so it's no wonder others have it too.

[Opti]

Luckily not having cable, I can avoid alot of this stuff so I don't have the fatigue I
probably would have otherwise. It does seem though anyone with a brain should
have seen how this Bergdahl thing would be controversial.


Blaming backlash on Obama hate is just lame and pathetic. A bunch of people
need to do better.

[Value Buy]

dj, your statement,

"The best way to avoid disillusionment is to avoid illusions" should be considered by this Administration.

It is good to hear some Dems are no longer liking the Kool Aid.

Now I wonder if they are all closet racists......must be.......

[djAdvocate]

Jun 9, 2014 21:16:58 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

dj, your statement,

"The best way to avoid disillusionment is to avoid illusions" should be considered by this Administration.

It is good to hear some Dems are no longer liking the Kool Aid.

Now I wonder if they are all closet racists......must be.......

your wit is endearing.

[Virgil Showlion]

Now seems about the usual time in a presidency for everyone to jump ship. Toss Pres. Obama and his various policies onto the trash heap. Give Hillary Clinton a good spit shine, stick her up there just far enough away from Pres. Obama to dissociate her from him. Give Jeb Bush a fresh coat of paint, put him up there next to Ms. Clinton to give voters the impression they have a choice of some kind.

Ms. Clinton will have one incredible strength: she isn't running under the same label as Pres. Bush--that Republican guy who presided over economic stagnation, several new military conflicts, and the wholesale dismantling of American civil liberties.

Mr. Bush will also have one incredible strength: he isn't running under the same label as Pres. Obama--that Democrat who presided over economic stagnation, several new military conflicts, and the wholesale dismantling of American civil liberties.

For no discernible reason everyone here will tune into the Hillary 'n Jeb show for a little over two years, analyzing and debating every little fart in the polls until one of the two is inevitably elected. And in a grand bit of irony, should Ms. Clinton get in, Democrats will be hoping (in vain) that she doesn't resemble Pres. Obama, while if Jeb Bush gets in, Republicans will be hoping in vain that he doesn't resemble Pres. Bush.

Independents will pick up precisely 0.4% of the popular vote. A new record.

And thus in one fell swoop I've declared all of my political predictions from now until November 2016.

[EVT1]

Thanks Debbie Downer

[Value Buy]

deminmaine

I have to agree with you.

Especially your last paragraph

He did promise to transform D.C. and I think that was part of the reason he captured the Independent vote.

The people behind his campaign in both elections are more idealists and idealogues, rather than political realists, but failed in the follow through on the call to action.

Everyone knows I am partially rightwing, but let me say, he is much more middle of the road than I ever felt he would be, but think it has to do more with his team not really knowing how to control politics to get their job done. That and not really thinking out the little details of big moves. The ACA and the terrorist handover are two gigantic examples of either arrogance to the political system, or not understanding true American politics as it actually exists.

Reagan and Clinton did. In Reagan's case it was probably more of his cabinet working behind the scenes, although he knew how to work with the Democrats in Congress to get his agenda accomplished, and was never afraid to make a private phone call to get any job done, and Clinton, probably a little more hands on, but both pretty much got the job of the President down pat and understood what it takes to do it.

I honestly believe he did not have enough time in the Senate to learn the system.

He arrived there and was the media and party's darling and no one bothered to show him how to accomplish things.

Whether anyone here thinks that is good or not, it is the system that we have.

He guaranteed change you can believe in, but never delivered it.

[Virgil Showlion]

You gentlemen are far too forgiving.

"That and continuing the Bush Presidency's careful path out of the fiscal collapse of the last decade, which you can applaud or revile." - I don't even know where to start with that one. As I've said to DJ and Ham in the past, try not to look too shocked when the real collapse happens.

The ACA is obviously an accomplishment for Pres. Obama. It was crafted with no transparency, it will add hundreds of billions to the US debt, and it basically amounts to a big wet kiss to the insurance companies at the expense of the American taxpayer, but Pres. Obama said he'd get it in and he got it in.

[cme1201]

Jun 10, 2014 7:42:52 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

... He guaranteed change you can believe in, but never delivered it.

After the 2008 election, I had hopes for Obama. I did not vote for him but, watched his speeches read his "plans" and desired to see how he was going to fundamentally change America. His promise to change the "tone" of Washington.

He had a reliable Congress, Star-Power and the ability to speak instead of using these items to his advantage he asked congress to give him something to do with health-care and he would sign it, he spent all of his existing and to exist political capital to see to it that something could be his Signature-Item.

Then came the blame-game, never accepting the responsibility of the office, always trying to remove himself from the leadership role of the office.

So after watching him pass the buck, shuck-and-jive around any issues raised against him and the pompous attitude that he is always right and those who do not agree are completely wrong for all the wrong reasons, he will be in the Millard Fillmore type of presidency, an unremarkable President who will be in History for 2 particular Items:
Fillmore 1. Last President not associated with with the Dems or Reps 2. Fugitive Slave Act
Obama  2. First African-American President 2. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

[PK Bucko]

I can see why some Dems would have Obama fatigue. He's not great at helping his own cause, as has been pointed out in a couple of previous posts. He lacks the charisma of Bill Clinton.

The ACA, which he considers a feather in his cap has turned into something of an albatross in that it seems every day there is something new screwed up about it. Even Time magazine had an article about some of the pitfalls of the ACA this week. 

Everything from the ACA to Bergdahl would wear on even the most loyal of political foot soldiers. 

[Virgil Showlion]

So Virgil, I will put you in the "revile" camp, which is precisely why I wrote it that way.

You might say I revile the theory that the two presidencies have plotted a path away from fiscal collapse. Your wording suggests that the theory is factual and that people might revile the presidents' collective success.

But I figured I knew what you meant.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 10, 2014 9:46:57 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Well if you truly follow Keynesian economic theory their course was precisely the right one, although a bit weak perhaps.  However this should be followed by pulling in the reigns of government spending and adjusting taxation to create balanced budgets during the good times.  Somehow the second part of that is often forgotten.

Actually, Keynes' original theory involved no indebtedness to finance stimulus in bad times. The idea was to set aside a public surplus during boom times and then spend it during cyclical busts. It wasn't until later theorists such as Ramsey and Solow came into the picture that economic theory split into the starkly differing "Keynes" and "Friedman-von Mises" camps, and economist began thinking of debt as a necessity rather than a liability.

Modern "Keynesianism" bears little resemblance to the seminal theory, and most economists acknowledge this.

Having said that, I very much do not "follow" modern Keynesian economic theory--for precisely the reason you mention.

[dondub]

 Eventually the free market will rebuild our roads, bridges, rail system and other infrastructure, supplying living wage jobs that benefit the economy.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 10, 2014 8:47:59 GMT -5 cme1201 said:

Jun 10, 2014 7:42:52 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

... He guaranteed change you can believe in, but never delivered it.

After the 2008 election, I had hopes for Obama. I did not vote for him but, watched his speeches read his "plans" and desired to see how he was going to fundamentally change America. His promise to change the "tone" of Washington.

He had a reliable Congress, Star-Power and the ability to speak instead of using these items to his advantage he asked congress to give him something to do with health-care and he would sign it, he spent all of his existing and to exist political capital to see to it that something could be his Signature-Item.

Then came the blame-game, never accepting the responsibility of the office, always trying to remove himself from the leadership role of the office.

So after watching him pass the buck, shuck-and-jive around any issues raised against him and the pompous attitude that he is always right and those who do not agree are completely wrong for all the wrong reasons, he will be in the Millard Fillmore type of presidency, an unremarkable President who will be in History for 2 particular Items:
Fillmore 1. Last President not associated with with the Dems or Reps 2. Fugitive Slave Act
Obama  2. First African-American President 2. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

i think you are significantly underestimating how awful Filmore was.  he is definitely a bottom tier president- one of the 10 worst in history.  there is no way that Obama will fall into that category, imo.  compared to the failures of, say, GW Bush, he is more of a sort of average president: middle quintile- UNLESS something horrible happens in his final two years, which is always possible, i guess.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 9, 2014 18:55:25 GMT -5 dondub said:

I had Obama fatigue by Feb. 2010 and I voted for him, just that once, so it's no wonder others have it too.

It's interesting that there was "Clinton Fatigue", "Bush Fatigue", and now there's "Obama Fatigue".  Gore had to run away from Clinton, McCain had to run away from Bush, and Hillary is going to have to ditch Obama (good luck, btw).

But nobody had "Reagan Fatigue".  The mass of voters were so scared that Bush 41 would deviate from the Reagan orthodoxy and return to his moderate / liberal Republican roots that he had to run-- HAD TO RUN-- as Reagan's third term; including making the famous, "Read my lips, no new taxes pledge" which he broke, and which cost him re-election.

Isn't the honest conclusion that Americans have a near endless appetite for strong, conservative leadership; but can only tolerate liberal/moderate leadership for so long before they're fed up?

[dondub]

"Read my lips, no new taxes pledge" 

  That was all BS campaign rhetoric. Reagan himself had already instituted the most massive tax increase ever on the middle class and working poor with his SS tax hike. ( The
surplusses created helped defray the rising national debt, tripled under his regime, and appalling to many real conservatives.

money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news/economy/reagan_years_taxes/

Bush had no choice but to continue in that vein as the debt continued to rise. Those tax cuts to the wealthy and huge increases in defense spending ar not what many would call 'fiscal responsibility'.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 10, 2014 12:55:15 GMT -5 dondub said:

"Read my lips, no new taxes pledge" 

  That was all BS campaign rhetoric. Reagan himself had already instituted the most massive tax increase ever on the middle class and working poor with his SS tax hike. ( The
surplusses created helped defray the rising national debt, tripled under his regime, and appalling to many real conservatives.

money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news/economy/reagan_years_taxes/

Bush had no choice but to continue in that vein as the debt continued to rise. Those tax cuts to the wealthy and huge increases in defense spending ar not what many would call 'fiscal responsibility'.

actually- he DID have an alternative- BALLOONING THE DEFICIT.  which, apparently, the GOP has no problem with.  they have been leading the way on deficit ballooning since 1981.

[dondub]

 I was afraid Paul would urp his chili and run out of beer if I said that.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 10, 2014 10:58:50 GMT -5 dondub said:

 Eventually the free market will rebuild our roads, bridges, rail system and other infrastructure, supplying living wage jobs that benefit the economy.

Well, it would.  But,




If government got out of the way- there's really no telling what a beautiful world free people, acting without fear of reprisal, or under coercion might do...

www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/05/chicago_artist_fills_potholes.html

Chicago artist fills potholes with mosaics of iconic city flag: Would that fly in Portland?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

It's a myth that Bush cut taxes for the wealthy. Bush made a mistake- but it wasn't cutting taxes on the wealthy, it was ending taxation for tens of millions of people. It was making the tax code more progressive than it has ever been in history. Bush's tax cuts were not conservative, pro-growth, across-the-board tax cuts-- they were largely gimmicks "credits" not "cuts" for approved classes / activities.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Bear in mind that when we are speaking of "surpluses" they exclude the big off-budget items like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 10, 2014 16:09:11 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

It's a myth that Bush cut taxes for the wealthy.

agreed.  but smart people don't make that argument.  they make the argument that it disproportionately favored the wealthy.  when i say disproportionately, i mean "above and beyond what they pay".  that is a fact.

Bush made a mistake- but it wasn't cutting taxes on the wealthy, it was ending taxation for tens of millions of people. It was making the tax code more progressive than it has ever been in history. Bush's tax cuts were not conservative, pro-growth, across-the-board tax cuts-- they were largely gimmicks "credits" not "cuts" for approved classes / activities.

they were stupid.  you don't cut taxes during wartime.  period.  he was the first to do it, and he ranks down there with Harding because of it.

[tallguy]

But nobody had "Reagan Fatigue".

Isn't the honest conclusion that Americans have a near endless appetite for strong, conservative leadership; but can only tolerate liberal/moderate leadership for so long before they're fed up?

Yes they did.  MANY people did.  The Reagan presidency was a disaster for the long-term future of this country.

And I prefer to think that Americans have a near endless appetite for strong, sensible, courageous, "looking out for the best interests of this country and its people" leadership.  Such a pity that so few people alive today have ever seen it.   

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

The bigger the government, the more power hungry people it attracts. Ultimately, We The People have to own this mess. Who was it that said people get the government they deserve?

[djAdvocate]

Jun 10, 2014 23:23:00 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

The bigger the government, the more power hungry people it attracts. Ultimately, We The People have to own this mess. Who was it that said people get the government they deserve?

this was discussed earlier this week.  i think it was DeToqueville or someone.  you know, back in the days when only white male landowners could vote?

[formerroomate99]

Honestly, I don't get why anyone would be surprised at the faults of the Obama presidency. This guy spent a few years in the ivory tower of academia, then chose to launch his political career in a city known for it's level of corruption, where Jesus Christ couldn't get elected if he ran on a Republican ticket. And we're supposed to believe that his administration is going to be transparent and that he'll be able to get along with people who disagree with him?

[dondub]

ourfuture.org/fact_sheet/ten-years-bush-tax-cuts-benefiting-rich