Many are mulling over whether the race would have been any different had John McCain made greater use of Barack Obama’s association with Reverend Wright. Well, it depends to a large extent on what he did with it and when he did it, I suppose.
He could have incorporated Wright in a theme of Obama as two-faced–presenting different views and images to different people. He might have made the point that Obama’s credibility was suspect (e.g. lying about his ignorance of Wright’s views). Or he might have used the relationship, along with those of other left-wing associates and organizations, to explain Obama radical views and background.
All of these themes, minus Wright, were tossed out at one time or another. Some will claim they “didn’t work,” so using Wright wouldn’t have made any differences. Others say Wright would have provided the perfect amplification to make those character assaults stick. Everyone will draw their own lesson.
However, one thing nags at conservatives: they suspect that the decision to reject use of Wright was based, not on a cold, cost-benefit analysis, but because of McCain’s inconsistent sense of “honor” and unwillingness to take heat from elite critics (who ironically gave him no credit). This personal, emotion-laden decision making style is a familiar McCain trait. If these critics are correct, the decision on Wright was inescapable. It naturally flowed from McCain, who in many ways was a politician hampered as much by his own personal and intellectual quirks and habits as by his opponent or the tough environment of this campaign.
So he said, “blah……..blah”.
Does anyone out there remember “Dr.” Irwin Corey. He was a comedian whose schtick was mastery over double-talk. To be sure, more polished, smooth, or, as the most recent winner of an Academy Award would say, elegant, but that’s exactly who Obama is like. Corey had a pretty good career. Can it work for a president?
Can you imagine LBJ babbling like that? This guy is literally out to lunch. Who knew there was a Chicago School of laissez-faire politics?
“So much for that all-important goal of bipartisanship.”
Who said it was all-important? What’s all important, according to the American people, is that Republicans work with Obama to pass Obama’s agenda.
According to the NYT/CBS poll, 79% believe that Republicans in Congress should put working with Obama ahead of their own policy objectives. Only 17% said the opposite.
Get with the program. America is seriously tired of your obstructionism. Let the smart guy work.
Seth–#3: That was Obama voting “present”.
Funny that a guy who’s so “smart” won’t disclose one iota of his actual academic record. One day we’re going to find out that he made Teddy Kennedy look like Immanuel Kant.
Pat, think for a moment about your poll. “Republicans in Congress should put cooperating with Obama ahead of their own policy objectives.” The Republicans in Congress were elected just like Obama was, and they won election based on the popularity of their policy objectives with their constituents. Seventy-nine percent of everyone wants them to lay these aside. But I’ll bet their specific constituents do not want the specific issues laid aside for which those constituents voted in November.
7
That’s would be a fair point if the numbers were closer. Particularly in the House, where the remaining Republicans tend to be from very conservative districts, their constituents may want them to stand opposed. Still, when you get to nearly 80%, even many of those who voted for Republicans for their local House seat must be opposed to GOP obstructionism.
ABC-WaPo poll backs up NYT/CBS. America wants to turn left:
“As President Barack Obama prepares to address a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, an ABC News-Washington Post poll gives him high marks on his first month in office, and support for his $787 billion economic stimulus package.
“A total of 68 percent of those surveyed approved of Obama’s performance. Nearly seven in 10 believe Obama is delivering on his promise to bring needed change to the nation’s capital, and about eight in 10 said he is meeting or exceeding their expectations.
“But Republicans are turning against the 44th president, despite his overtures and pledge of bipartisan.
“Only 37 percent of Republicans approve of how Obama has handled the presidency. By contrast, 90 percent of Democrats and 67 percent of independents approve of Obama’s job performance.
“Obama seems to hold the high ground in his battles with Republicans on Capitol Hill.
“According to the ABC-Post poll, 61 percent said they trust Obama more than the Republicans on economic matters, with just 26 percent siding with the congressional Republicans.
“Overall, reported the Post, Democrats maintain a nearly two-to-one edge over Republicans as the party that Americans prefer to confront “the big issues” over the next few years.”
Pat: Do you really want to live and die by the polls? If so, I suspect you are in for a very short life.
If Obama were truly in favor of bipartisanship, he would be pushing back against the excesses of his own party. His response to Rep. Barton makes it clear that he has no interest in doing anything to rein in the D’s — not surprising, since he’s in favor of the pseudo-socialist programs they love.
The fatal mistake of this presidency was the double-whammy of the stimulus bill and the ill-conceived mortgage program. And, since you only believe in polls, the polls will “prove” that fatality to you, within the year.
This guy is a joke. And he put Joe Biden in charge of the implementation of the stimulus? Lord! I tell you what, this economic stimulus is going to be Obama’s Iraq. He is bungling this whole thing from the absolute waste of the stimulus, to the ambiguous Keitner plan, to the Rick Santelli revolting housing plan–Obama is really digging his hole deep. The problem is that instead of being guided by economics, Obama is being guided by politics. He wants to pay off his constituencies with the stimulus, raise taxes to punish success and halt upward mobility (again constituency), keep the politically connected ailing banks afloat, and open up the borders with amnesty for illegal aliens (more constituency). None of this has any resemblance of good economics and so it will keep the economy from fully recovering. Bill Clinton paid a price for his tax and spend policies prior to 1994, but luckily for old Bill the Democratic majority bit the dust for those policies (and of course he only had Bob Dole to run against in 1996). Obama it seems has not learned from that experience and is slated to go ahead with the largest tax increase in American history after the mid-term elections (for fiscal year 2011). That would then mean he will have to deal with the aftermath of that policy in 2012. I think that at some point Obama will have to get back to reality with the markets cratering and unemployment rising. Look for an Obama “surge” to occur next year to save his bacon, by taking back alot of the stimulus spending and cutting the corporate income tax and maybe even make permanent the Bush tax cuts on capital gains, dividends, and hopefully estates.
9
Yeah, you guys told me the same thing during the election. How’d that work out? I’ve been designing and reading polls my entire working life. I know their limitations. I also know how useful they can be. Maybe if you paid closer attention to them, you wouldn’t “stay the course” so long with losing messages and tactics.
The Israelis, on the one hand, need to be need to be more trusting. And the Palestinians, on the other hand, need to be more responsible.
Just words.
#12 Pat: You’re missing the point. Under your logic, if most Americans believe in the stimulus and other programs of Obama, those programs will necessarily be an economic success. Would it were so easy. But that hasn’t worked since we all stopped believing in Santa Claus (you do have a poll to substantiate that, I assume). And Santa Obama is no more real than the jolly old fellow in red.
I’d say you’ve been designing and reading polls way too long. Try looking at reality for a change — it has a plus-or-minus-zero margin of error.
I am sure that Pat was lambasting Democrats for opposing Bush when his ratings were high. Weren’t she?
13
That would be an interesting argument, if it had anything to do with anything I wrote.
I guess I should let your strawman fight his own battles, since this one has nothing to do with me.
Abe Greenwald wrote that bipartisanship was all important. According to who? Not according to the American people. Abe Greenwald implied that Barack Obama was the one abandoning bipartisanship. Not according to the perceptions of the American people. They see it the other way around. Polls support my arguments.
Your ever shifting “point” just shows that you really have none.
How many times do I have to point out that polls are the result of perceptions that are constructions of the media? How many Americans have had access to the results of an Obama IQ test? How many have personally talked to him? How many have listened to his detailed explanation of economics? Zero, zero, zero. Their knowledge of Obama is derived 100% from what they see on television and read in newspapers and magazines. Most Americans, no matter their presidential vote, are hoping this person can somehow lead the country out of the morass he keeps warning us about. Maybe that’s the “audacity of hope”.
It’s like Neil Cavuto said: this fiscal responsibility summit was the equivalent of an AA meeting.
According to the NYT/CBS poll, 79% believe that Republicans in Congress should put working with Obama ahead of their own policy objectives. Only 17% said the opposite.
Get with the program. America is seriously tired of your obstructionism. Let the smart guy work.
***
And your second mistake was believeing anything the NYT had to say.
The Republicans should represent their principles…that’s what their constituents voted for…and offer alternatives in line with those principles. That is not obstructionism. They are being at least as cooperative as the Democrats have been since 2000.
Which smart guy are we supposed to “let work”? If you mean Obama, remember, he’s the President, not the Emperor. He doesn’t make the laws…at least, not yet.
“America wants to turn left.”
Speak for yourself, Pat. 48% of the voters did not vote to turn left, and a lot of the 52% clearly did not care what they were voting for as long as it was Hope and Change. Get a life.
Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. – Mark Twain
Yeah, President Obama, we know already that you don’t want to “interject” yourself “too much into congressional politics.” We learned that one the hard way. Thanks for nothing.
We’ve also known for some time that bipartisanship as defined by the left occurs only when the right capitulates and does whatever it is the left wants. It’s now been defined (dumbed?) down further by this president to schmoozing, having Republicans over to the ‘House for pretzels, beer and football, and joking around at “summits.” And I think the minority has been plenty “constructive.” They’ve offered a good many ideas about what kinds of legislation they believe would truly be stimulative (and it’s not like there aren’t plenty of economists who agree with them). One gets the idea that “constructive” is defined much the same as “bipartisan” and that once Republicans agree to agree with Obama, they will have succeeded in being both.