Obama and the 2010 Midterms
Results for the 2010 midterms are trickling in as I write this. First off, I respect what President Obama is trying to do; I believe he wants the best for the American people. I do have strong reservations on a few areas of his policy, but I am not expecting total agreement from a politician. Moreover, the job of the Presidency is without a doubt tough: So much is riding on the decisions the President makes, and there will always be pressure from both the Right and the Left. That's just the nature of politics. He and the Democrats in Congress managed to pass a healthcare bill that prohibits some of the more odious practices of the insurance companies.
But viscerally the economy still feels bad; unemployment is the figure the average American really cares about. The conservative message machine has been beating the war drums against the Democrats practically from Obama’s inauguration. Frankly, the Republicans are better at driving a consistent message than the Democrats (minus the Tea Party shuffle), and although I prefer open discussion and a diversity of views, party discipline is admittedly effective. Democrats lost control of the narrative despite their majorities, and this weakened them considerably leading up to today.
This is where leadership counts. Obama ran an inspirational campaign in 2008, and he could definitely project the charisma needed to unite his party behind him. I would even suggest a more aggressive approach in setting the tone and setting the narrative, leaving Republicans to respond and defend. For example, the BP oil spill was the perfect opportunity to demonstrate leadership by immediately taking charge, addressing the American people, and compelling BP to remedy the situation; it’s a matter of national security. However, Obama, by temperament, prefers to take a highly deliberative approach and to build a consensus, where each side gains something, but the bipartisan approach breaks down when the opposing party embraces a realpolitik where the goal is his defeat. The Republicans slowly wore down the Democrats and extracted a multitude of procedural delays and compromises while driving a consistent message about dysfunctional government. Keynesian economic theory is too abstract and counterintuitive for many people. Simplify: Stimulus should have been presented as an investment like a college education, and its benefits should be tangible in job creation and real infrastructure improvement.
A strong progressive narrative would make voting for things like stimulus and healthcare reform less politically risky for Democrats in more conservative districts and states. Healthcare reform and social welfare, especially during a recession, can easily be linked to Christian values, something appealing to conservatives. Don’t shy away from liberalism: Make the link. Tolerance of different religions and sexual orientations and social welfare can all be tied to traditional American values. If you’re not willing to stand up and say what happens to your neighbors down the street or their house does matter, you’ve lost before you ever began. You don’t need to go shooting guns to prove you get Middle America; you just need to speak to your convictions.
Now that it looks like the Republican Party is poised to take the House of Representatives, it looks like Obama will have to reach an actual working compromise between Democrats and Republicans, though. The Republicans will be driving the discussion to the budget deficit, government spending, and taxes. In the process, I hope Democrats remember not to play their hand too early and actually stake out positions where they can work out balanced compromise, extracting concessions from the Republicans as they negotiate an agreement, willing to paint the Republicans as the bad guys if they want to cut into unemployment benefits, for example.
Obama’s next two years will be chastening, but with a good message and the right strategy, Obama can still deliver on the hope and change he promised in 2008.
Matt Wittmann