Obama may be planning a "reasonable" jobs program

[WI_DEM]

I hope this is just to keep the GOP off guard and that he will actually present a bold package:

Liberals are pressing the president to shoot big, urging a dramatic infusion of cash and warning against a Republican-lite proposal that fails to boost the economy or his reelection prospects.But so far, Obama and his senior aides are describing the package in more down-to-earth terms, as a “reasonable” set of proposals that Republicans will be hard-pressed to reject.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62302.html#ixzz1WWZaOoMk

That has been the problem with Barack Obama, if this proves accurate, he doesn't think Big. He doesn't go bold. Then begins negotiating at a point where Dems have already given up a lot. Obama always thinks by being 'reasonable' that he will get those independent voters. But that strategy hasn't been working. He needs to give labor and the Dem base something to be excited about and fight for! Not some Republican-lite plan which will be even more watered down when the GOP gets done with it.

Hopefully he will surprise us this time. I hope so.

[demwing]

1. I hope so too - we're running low on opportunities to be surprised

and the Pres is painting himself into a corner...

[jpbollma]

3. Shameful

someone needs to teach him how to negotiate. You start big and work from there. He will put out a "reasonable" plan filled with mostly GOP ideas which they will of course shoot down and move the discourse further to the Right yet again. The President and his staff are not idiots, they are intelligent people..they are simply complicit.

[Mr Deltoid]

8. He starts out at 'reasonable' which means the GOP get 2/3 of what they want

The GOP then goes 'full loco' and pushes the issue to the extreme. Obama then takes up the position previously held by the GOP, which now seems not as bad compared to their extreme position, and labels it, 'fair compromise'. Of course they cry foul and Obama gives them even more, getting nothing in return but a few token crumbs.

The whole negotiation is aimed at 'compromising' rather than solving the problem. The process is more important to Obama than the end result. Sadly, nobody remembers the process, only the end result.

[frylock]

39. and then it gets added to "The List" as an accomplishment

[txlibdem]

49. Added to "The List" even though the GOP got 98% of what THEY wanted

That's what knocks me to the floor with these Obama supporters. How many times do you have to be kicked in the nuts till you understand that "your representative" isn't playing for your side???

[pnorman]

14. Yes, he's had a pampered existence.

He's lived in a bubble as an "Affirmative Action Baby", and doesn't yet know the harsh realities of real life.

[demwing]

44. I'd alert, but by Sarcasm detector is tingling

right?

[pnorman]

52. I saw no need for a sarcasm tag when it's so obvious.

n/t

[Little Star]

46. "complicit" Yep, that describes this whole gang of Dems!

[roguevalley]

40. what an asshat coward he is but then every generation needs its

hoover. why not aim for Jupiter and settle for mars. God, what a worthless fool he is.

[gkhouston]

2. Wish in one hand... n/t

[demwing]

45. and you've got a handful of wishes

were you going to say something else?

[TwilightGardener]

4. The thinking behind it is that Republicans will howl about "stimulus spending" if

the proposal is too sweeping. Don't forget, a lot of the country thinks stimulus = wasted money. Broken down into smaller discrete chunks, it stands a better chance of passing.

[WI_DEM]

5. I doubt any spending has the chance of getting thru the GOP House

so he might as well go bold. Go big and start with that as your negotiating side rather than small and negotiate even smaller.

[TwilightGardener]

6. If nothing gets passed, there will be no results. That's all people care about--

they don't care who proposed what, or that Republicans don't want the economy to improve.

[Mr Deltoid]

41. Stopping a bad result IS a good result

nt

[Little Star]

48. The result would be that main street would see them as

fighting for what is good for main street.

They would just have to use the bully pulpit to explain why a main street stimulus is what we need. Of course then they would have to fix main street instead of this trickle down save the banksters crap. They would also have to fix this free trade crap that is killing us!

But, they are just in this for themselves. They are bought and paid for, imho!

[Fumesucker]

10. The Republicans are going to howl no matter what Obama does..

It's what Republicans *do*..

[TwilightGardener]

12. Right. However, beyond the howling, something beneficial must get passed.

It's the old dilemma with Obama--critics charge his ideas and proposals aren't bold enough, but bold won't pass.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

19. Go bold and *make* the Republicans defend their position!

Enough with this half-assed shit.

[TwilightGardener]

23. They will defend it. And people will believe them. Democrats don't own

the press or the airwaves. And in the end, they'll vote down what Democrats propose, and most people won't know or care who voted which way. They'll only know nothing got passed and nothing improved, and it's the President's fault. The debt ceiling fiasco dragged poll numbers down for Obama (which is what Republicans were aiming for), because all people saw was "squabbling" and then the stock market tanked. They don't understand much more than that. They don't understand that the debt ceiling was a matter of simple housekeeping before, and was never a big deal. So the whole "propose something big and let everyone see that Republicans are EVIL when it doesn't pass" game plan never works. Obama will get blamed if nothing improves, period--no matter how Republicans "look" at any given time, and he knows that.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

26. Hmmm, sounds like a cop out to me.

Let's just give up and surrender.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

27. Also, the whole debt ceiling fiasco reflected poorly on Obama ...

... precisely because he didn't stand up to the hostage takers.

Not the other way around.

[RaleighNCDUer]

34. You talk as if we are supposed to submit our final proposal right out the gate.

That is what negotiation is about - we make a proposal, they say "this won't do", we (very publicly) take "this" out of the proposal (the "this" we didn't expect to get in the first place) and say "OK, we're being reasonable - we gave on "this", now you be reasonable and pass the REST of the package."

You DON'T propose what you want the final bill to look like. You HAVE to put in crap that they can cut from the final bill. If you propose exactly what you think is necessary, you will inevitably get something less than what is necessary.

It ain't rocket science.

[TwilightGardener]

35. I understand that--see post #31.

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. Nobody EXPECTS 'bold' to pass. But you have to put something on the table

for the other side to knock down so THEY can go to their constituents and claim a victory. If you water it down to what is acceptable to the other side, you will get LESS than that, because they will not let you pass legislation without taking SOMETHING away from it; otherwise, they will be seen as giving in to the Dems.

'Bi-partisanship' only runs one way, if you haven't noticed.

[Raine]

24. If the country thinks "stimulus=wasted money" then Obama needs to explain to them

exactly why it wasn't wasted, that is a part of his job ... to inform the public and make a case.

[TwilightGardener]

28. His administration's messaging has been one of their weaker areas, for sure.

I really, really hope they pull together a campaign that shows, in very concrete terms, just what the stimulus and other programs have done for average Americans, and for state and local governments.

[RaleighNCDUer]

29. They will howl no matter WHAT is proposed.

Realizing that, the only rational response is to give them something to howl about, and negotiate down from there. Request 3x what you want, be forced to 'give away' 2/3 of it, and what are you left with? EXACTLY what you really wanted in the first place. And the opposition can still claim a victory, by forcing you to back off by 60%.

It ain't rocket science.

[TwilightGardener]

31. Part of me agrees with that--ask for way more than what you are finally willing to accept.

In politics, however, that may be read as defeat, no matter how much one claims victory. I also don't think Obama likes to do that. For better or for worse, he seems to try to figure out exactly what he'll end up with, and lay it out there. I don't think he relishes political back-and-forth, he certainly doesn't like to play games or waste time. IMO, it's what makes him different from Bill Clinton, who loved that sort of thing. But then I remember Clinton didn't make many big sweeping proposals either, after the health care thing--the hounding of him was relentless. It's what they do to Democratic Presidents. They are no longer allowed to be successful.

[RaleighNCDUer]

36. Is that somehow better than claiming as victory something which was

actually a defeat, such as welfare 'reform' and NAFTA? The first created a half-million homeless, the second sent several million jobs overseas, but they were touted as 'victories' for the Dems. I'd rather the Repubs be able to say "We beat them down" while passing good, effective legislation, than claim victory while passing half-assed or outright bad legislation.

"They are no longer allowed to be successful."

That's the whole point of this - propose huge, sweeping legislation, allow the repbugs to "be successful" in killing 2/3 of the proposal, and ending up with something that actually accomplishes our goals. They can crow all they want about kicking our butts, but if the end result is a strong economy and effective government, WE will win in the long term.

[Little Star]

47. It is wasted when spent bailing out the banksters....

Maybe try a main street stimulus. One that creates jobs that pay a living wage and fix FREE trade??????????????

Bet the tune would change then.

[Dappleganger]

7. No, we need an over the top jobs program...

"reasonable" smells of capitulation and big biz tax cuts.

[GreenPartyVoter]

11. Yep

[peace frog]

13. Take a big whiff

Yep, it reeks. Typical Obama response: the biggest benefits flow to those who least need them. USA! USA! USA!

[gratuitous]

9. Could we skip the pre-emptive compromise this time around?

Go BIG. Real big. Super big. And when you get to "super big" Mr. President, go about two levels bigger. Start from there. Talk it up. Get your people out in front of cameras, behind microphones, on every talk show that will book you. Talk. Talk, talk, talk. Set the agenda, frame the issue. Make sure that the first words out of every Republican's mealy little mouth has to address your really, truly BOLD plan before settling into their rote talking points.

Do the heavy lifting now, and it could be easier come September.

[jpbollma]

15. The other problem

which people aren't discussing is that even IF (and I have doubts) Obama did want to go big, about 1/3 of his own party would shoot it down. A large segment of the Democratic Party no longer represents working class people in any form. Think Baucus, Nelson, Conrad...then all the "New Dempublicans" in the House. We really should just be focusing on supporting the Progressive Caucus and ask them to take a stronger stand on things. THey need to pull a Tea Party move, get in front of all the cameras and say they will not support anything unless (insert progressive ideas) are included.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

21. Good point. n/t

[Fantastic Anarchist]

20. Of course, you are assuming that he actually wants to help the average person ...

... and not his corporate contributors.

[Romulox]

51. It's not "compromise". The "compromise" is when the President throws lefties a bone.

The President isn't "compromising" when he adopts conservative positions; these are his true beliefs.

[kenny blankenship]

16. Let's hope he's willing to listen to good ideas from the Republicans!

[bowens43]

17. another give away to the cons in the works........ nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

18. I don't expect to be surprised.

He's doing this intentionally. Wealth distribution to the elite is his game plan, and a "bold" job proposal works against that.

[Javaman]

22. He thinks like a lawyer...

Nothing wrong with that, but it's usually safe, well researched and has a counter argument.

With bold or thinking big, those can be countered and not have good supporting arguments other than...it's for the people.

And in this day in age, nothing is ever done for the people. That is considered a weak argument.

And here we are. Neither bold or big do we get. We get safe, researched and unimaginative.

On edit: the one thing that I has been hard for me to define about Obama that drives me crazy, other than him giving everything away before the negotiations even begin is, for example: when asking for a raise, always ask for more. go big, then horse trade down to a manageable acceptable amount. Obama always asks for he wants, never goes in high, then...well we know the rest.

[dennis4868]

25. MSNBC this morning...

was saying they were hearing reports that Obama is going to go big...but whatever Obama does it will not become law...repubs will block it so what the hell is the difference anymore? We need to take back the house and get 60 in the senate...then we can talk real progress.

[Bluebear]

30. New free trade agreements! It's practical and everyone wins!

:sarcasm:

[Enrique]

33. "hard-pressed to reject"

wanna bet?

[Maven]

37. Barack O'Hoover never fails to disappoint.

Expecting a "bold" anything from him is like expecting a cool, rainy day in Texas these days.

[frylock]

38. i heard on NPR that he was going to try the reasonable approach. my reaction:

ARE YOU FUCKING STUPID?!!! literally yelled that out on my drive into work.

[Zax2me]

42. 'Infusion of cash' - from where, Pluto?

We spent all we had and then took money from our children and grandchildren's generations.
Wasted that too.
Spent more and went in the hole more with last stimulus.

We are broke and the Chinese are afraid to lend us any more money.

[hulka38]

43. Now that they've helped kill Keynesianism

the Democratic leadership won't breathe life back into it, even if it's the right thing to do politically, practically and morally.

[Romulox]

50. He's coming to DETROIT, to push "FREE TRADE", on LABOR DAY!!!!

:wtf:

[Brickbat]

53. Well, why not? The economic hole we're in is perfectuly reasonable -- no need to go all New Deal on

it or something. Besides, I bet those Republicans have some good ideas on how to get jobs going. I know, TAX CUTS!