“Punting the Pundits” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.
Peter Daou: Resolving the “Obama Paradox” (The Most Successful Failed Presidency in a Generation)
The intense dispute over President Obama’s personality, principles and policies is a proxy for the larger debate over the history, values, ideological composition and direction of America. The focus is on the person, but the battle is over the nation.
In that context, a number of progressive activists and observers (this writer included) have spent the past 18 months repeatedly making the case that the Obama administration’s unwillingness to stake out a strong, principled, progressive position on key issues is detrimental to Obama’s political fortunes, to the Democratic Party’s electoral prospects and most importantly, to the country. Looking at polls, trends, midterm projections, the economy, the environment, the war in Afghanistan, etc., the facts on the ground appear to have borne out that view.
snip
Further, the definitions of success and failure that undergird the “Obama Paradox” are exceedingly amorphous. Is it about legislative wins, no matter the underlying substance? Is it public opinion as reflected in polls? Is it pundit consensus and conventional wisdom?
And who defines success or judges which issue or question is the most important? Is it jobs? The Gulf disaster? Health care? Is Obama a progressive, a centrist, a corporatist, a socialist? Are we winning or losing Afghanistan? Is Obama the next FDR, Bush-lite, the anti-Bush, or the un-Reagan?
snip
So how do we resolve the present contradictions surrounding President Obama and how do we make a fair assessment of his tenure? To the extent that we can, we do so by clarifying our approach in advance of our judgment. A reporter looking at facts and data should first choose the metric(s). It might be the number of campaign promises kept, or legislation passed, or public opinion polls and trends, or economic stats, or a weighted combination of several factors.
For activists and opinion-makers, the process is somewhat different: it’s about fundamental ideals and values against which the president’s actions are measured.
For the general public, it’s a mix of personal circumstances (how the administration’s policies affect them and their families), their values, what the media tells them, what their friends and family think, and so on.
Whatever the parameters and methods, there are several ways to reach an informed, albeit incomplete, view of Obama’s presidency. Naturally, some of these views will be contradictory. From certain perspectives Obama is successful, from others he’s not – there’s nothing paradoxical about that.
What’s far more interesting is that there is one thing Obama can do that transcends the ebb and flow of events, the endless swirl of opinion, the daily wins and losses, the progress and setbacks that constitute governing. It is the one thing with lasting appeal and enduring value and a prerequisite for unqualified success in any endeavor: standing for something worthwhile, for a set of well-articulated principles, and fighting for those principles tooth and nail.
The real Obama paradox is why that hasn’t happened when it’s good policy and good politics.
Marty Kaplan: Thank You, Robert Gibbs
If Robert Gibbs hadn’t said last week that Democrats may lose the House in November, then House Democrats might not have been so infuriated that the president himself had to travel to Capitol Hill to let them vent.
And if Obama hadn’t personally heard how enraged they are by Senate Republicans, and how galled they’ve been by the White House’s clueless kumbayas, then he might not have come to his senses at last in his weekly address on Saturday, when he drove a stake through the heart of the post-partisan vampire that has possessed him since his election.
Richard Cohen: Who is Barack Obama?
On Sunday, both The Post and the New York Times assembled more than 20 savants and asked them, as the Times put it, “How Can Obama Rebound?” Good question. Not only do six out of 10 voters “lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country,” according to a Post-ABC News poll, but Barack Obama does not even get credit for the right decisions he’s made. The bank bailout averted a financial crackup and the stimulus package pulled the economy back from the abyss. Along with reform of the financial industry and health care, these are considerable achievements. Only the voters disagree.
Why? Some of the answers are apparent. The economy remains sluggish and unemployment remains high. The effects of the health-care act have yet to be felt and the ink is hardly dry on financial reform. Until these measures prove popular, they can be mischaracterized by Republicans and other evil-doers. As for the economy, not letting things get worse is not the same as making them better. If you’re out of work, it hardly cheers you that the recession stopped at your house and spared the guy next door. It’s your job that matters
snip
What has come to be called the Obama Paradox is not a paradox at all. Voters lack faith in him making the right economic decisions because, as far as they’re concerned, he hasn’t. He went for health-care reform, not jobs. He supported the public option, then he didn’t. He’s been cold to Israel’s Binyamin Netanyahu and then all over him like a cheap suit. Americans know Obama is smart. But we still don’t know him. Before Americans can give him credit for what he’s done, they have to know who he is. We’re waiting.
1 comments
Author