No matter how far Obama tries to appease Republicans, voters will judge him according to the results

[Better Believe It]

Obama’s Paradox Problem
By E.J. Dionne, Jr.
August 31, 2011

Call it the Party-of-Government Paradox: If the nation’s capital looks dysfunctional, it will come back to hurt President Obama and the Democrats, even if the Republicans are primarily responsible for the dysfunction.

Then there is the Bipartisanship Paradox: No matter how far the president bends over backward to appeal to or appease the Republicans—no matter how nice, conciliatory, friendly or reasonable he tries to be—voters will judge him according to the results. And the evidence since 2009 is that accommodation won’t get Obama much anyway.

This creates the Election Paradox: Up to a point, Republicans in Congress can afford to let their own ratings fall well below the president’s, as long as they drag him further into negative territory. If the president’s ratings are poor next year, Democrats won’t be able to defeat enough Republicans to take back the House and hold the Senate. The GOP can win if the mood is terribly negative toward Washington because voters see Obama as the man in charge.

.... the trend on the president’s numbers has been downward, and the Republicans seem willing to pay a high price to keep them moving that way. Remember: the core GOP argument is that government can’t do much good and generally makes everyone’s life worse. Democrats are the ones who insist that government can solve problems and improve people’s lives. If government isn’t doing that—if it is discredited and made to look foolish—guess whose side of the debate is weakened?

Read the full article at:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/obamas_paradox_problem_20110831/

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

1. Sad, but true. Americans are not politically sophisticated, and that includes

the ones who think they are. Most Americans don't care about the political process, the obstructionsim of the Republican Party, parliamentary rules, and facts. All they care about are the results.

The Republican Party knows this. That's why they get away with it. And that's why they do what they do.

John Kerry lost because he was trying to explain the Amendment process ("I voted for it before I voted against it..."). The problem is that Americans are too uninformed, too preoccupied with other things to get informed, and too impatient.

Again, the Republican Party knows this.

The problem with the Democratic Party and us liberals is that we assume that Americans will look at the underlying facts. They won't and they don't! All they care about is the outcome, and rightfully so.

That is why I have a hard time with many folks here on DU blaming the president and the Democratic Party. We got so much done in Congress two years ago, but people do not understand how the Republicans in the Senate issued holds and filibusters to obstruct progress.

They know that the party in power gets the blame whether it's that party's fault or not.

The assumption in the Democratic Party that the American people will eventually see what's going on and punish the Republicans is the height of arrogance.

The American people *do not* care about procedure or facts. Indeed, they don't care how many crafty speeches the president gives at the "bully pulpit." Those speeches would be forgotten in a matter of days. (Just look around here.)

What the American people care about are results. And rightfully so! Can't blame them, though it is a tragedy that the wrong people are blame and have to suffer as a result.

[leftstreet]

2. Obama and the Dems had their chance to bring 'results'

They blew it

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

4. No they didn't!! Again, do you realize how many bills passed the House?

Even with those that were thwarted in the Senate, we got over 200 signed into law? Do you know this?

And if you no longer have faith in the Democratic Party, why do you waste your time here??!?!

[leftstreet]

10. omg you're not going to post 'The List' are you?

:cry:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

16. Stop crying. I'm not wasting my time with you on a list. In fact, I have never posted

a list and I never will.

If you have no faith in the Democratic Party, then it's silly for you to still on a Democratic Party forum.

As a result, there's nothing more to say.

Off to ignore you go! :bye:

[Fresh_Start]

3. The voters shouldn't have to be politically sophisticated

they should vote on results. Actual results.

But most of the time, knowing the results requires knowing facts, trends, analysis.
So the voters don't vote on results. They vote on positioning, hype, sound bytes.

I only wish that they did vote on results.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

5. Uh...then you agree on everything I've stated here. And, what's more,

no more whining and complaining about what the Democrats should or should not do and how the president should utilize the "Bully Pulpit." If Americans don't care about any of those things, then none of the whining about pulpits will work anyway.

So, what's your suggestion, then?

If that suggestion falls anywhere along of the lines of voting, then I'm with you. But if that suggestion involves the same tired talking points about what the party should do or what the president didn't do, then save your fingers. You will be ignored!

[Fresh_Start]

6. I have voted in every national election since I was eligible to vote

I donated to candidates
I occasionally do volunteer work for candidates
I write to my representatives.

Even if I didn't, I'm allowed to criticize, to coax, to encourage.
Like 85% of Americans I am disgusted by the current situation in our government.
So don't expect me or them to stop complaining, or stop demanding.

It won't change without leadership.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

And it definitely won't change without the people. I'm happy that you voted.

I didn't imply that you didn't. But, there are too many people who think that one man can do everything and change the world. He can make as many pretty speeches as we wants, but if people don't vote, what good is that?

[Better Believe It]

11. People voted for progressive change and didn't get it. What good is that?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

14. People didn't vote for enough "progressive" change, so it's NOT good enough!

They kept voting for Blue Dogs and DLCers at the state and congressional elections.

While Dean's 50 State Strategy was a success, it still gave us more Blue Dogs and LESS progressives.

When I stress that we vote, I mean that if we really and truly do want more progressive/liberal outcomes, we need to support more progressives/liberals at the state, local and congressional level.

You understood what I meant because I've been making this point ad nauseum forever on DU. Either you're not paying attention, or just being unnecessarily argumentative and belligerent.

You want more progressive policy outcomes? Vote for more progressives. It's really just that simple.

[Better Believe It]

20. So if the Democratic Party doesn't run progressives in your district what do you do?

Vote Republican?

I don't.

Well, you certainly can't vote for an independent progressive candidate so vote for the right-wing democratic "blue dog" candidate!

It's really just that simple!

[scheming daemons]

7. And no matter what results he gets, you will spin to diminish them

It is what you do, BBI

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. But, he leaves no cave unexplored or unexploited or not termed a "victory". K&R

[moondust]

9. That's what Republicans are counting on.

But recent poll numbers suggest that the public generally knows what the Teapublicans in Congress are up to.

It might be a good idea to remind people from time to time that this is not a dictatorship no matter how much it behaved like one during the authoritarian, "unitary executive" Bush administration.

[Better Believe It]

12. Why and how did Democratic politicians enable George W. Bush to act like an authoritarian?

[moondust]

15. Who said Democrats enabled him?

You forget the period when Republicans had full control of the federal government?

Oh yes...and Democrats didn't filibuster every single thing Republicans wanted to pass?

[Better Believe It]

18. I just wrote that. Have you forgotten the Democratic leadership deal to not "filibuster" Bush's ...

Supreme Court appointments?

That's how Bush got his two most right-wing Supreme Court appointments approved by the Senate.

That's just one example for starters.

I believe the bi-partisan group was called the "gang of 14".

[B Calm]

13. and I'll judge him for trying to appease Republicans

[LoZoccolo]

17. Are liberal Democrats judging him by results when they approve of him in greater numbers than

moderates and conservative Democrats? Does this mean he is liberal?

[Better Believe It]

19. In November 2012 how will most voters respond to the question .....

"Are you doing better now than four years ago?"

Results indeed!

The answer to that most important question will determine how President Obama's administration will be judge by radicals, liberals, moderates, independents and conservatives who vote.

"It's the economy, stupid!"

[Bobbie Jo]

21. Don't take your eye off the prize. nt