An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right

Obama’s Biggest Political Problem: Democrats?

What is proving to be a huge problem for President Barack Obama? It’s turning out to be members of his own political party — not that that many (including many who write on this site) didn’t predict that this could happen. But it’s becoming increasingly clear with each passing day that Obama has to battle two sides of his own party (liberal and more conservative Democrats) as he is all the while demonized and denounced by GOPers.

CNN”s Gloria Borger summarizes the situation perfect. After saying that Obama deserves a lot of credit for pushing and framing the health care debate she writes:

The strategy was forthright: Since the country has debated this issue for decades, there’s no need to redo it all. And don’t write a bill like Clinton did so Congress can spend its time picking it apart. Rather, let the committees (five in all) move their bills and reconcile them until the House and Senate each has a product. The president weighs in when the two chambers try to reach agreement on a final bill.

Presto, health care reform.

Ah, but this is Congress we’re talking about. Should it be any surprise that some congressional Democrats — having suffered in the minority under a Republican president — have decided to unleash their inner liberal? No matter how badly the GOP opposition behaves — and no matter how bereft it is of ideas of its own — the Democrats seem happy to aid Republicans in their one clear goal for Obama: defeat.

The president has called for cost controls above all else in health care reform. He even wants to take Medicare spending decisions out of the political arena and put them in the hands of the docs and technical nerds, who actually understand where real cost savings can be found. But that would require Congress to relinquish some power, so it hasn’t happened.

Instead, Obama’s Democrats have so far given him higher costs (according to the Congressional Budget Office) and higher taxes. Or, in technical parlance, the same-old, same-old.

But she thinks Obama deserves some of the blame if health care fizzles — particularly since the issue has been nearly an impossible one to solve for years:

The trouble for Obama is that he’s getting tethered to some of the bad ideas the Democrats propose because he hasn’t denounced them. We know that he’s cool and patient, but maybe his drooping recent poll numbers will cause him to start drawing some lines in the sand. Americans still like their new president, but they’re clearly wondering why he has let congressional Democrats inhabit his body.

In a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, for instance, approval of his handling of health care has slid from 57 percent to 49 percent since April. And the Democrats’ foray into taxing the rich hasn’t done Obama any favors, either: Just one month ago, voters earning more than $50,000 liked Obama more than the GOP on health care by a 2-1 margin.

Today, those voters are evenly split. And independent voters — the key to Obama’s electoral success — are leaving the flock. In April, 57 percent of independents approved his handling of health care; that has now dipped to 44 percent, and 49 percent disapprove.

As she notes, Obama often talks about eschewing petty bickering — which he means partisan bickering. But his big task is to try and control it in his own party.

In reality, those of us who are increasingly weary of watching the partisan and intraparty wars have to conclude this:

(1)When Republicans are in power by and large their party members are more cohesive and work in conjunction with their party leader if he is in the White House. GOPers often take direction from above (the White House) The Republicans under Bush almost resembled a parliamentary party.

(2)Democrats have a problem with intra party bickering, overreaching and acting like sugar-deprived kids unleashed in a candy shop when they get into power. Democrats resist direction from above. One way of looking at it, is that they insist on reflecting their constituencies. The other is that they try to make up for lost time — coming into office and trying to shove through old Things To Do Lists that they never got around to containing approaches to policies that some in America’s middle reject and would have rejected by voting against the Ds if they knew they would be Topic A once the Demmies got into power.

The key issue always has been whether Obama could carve out and consolidate America’s middle, creating a lasting coalition that could give him sustained support in office and for his party in elections.

Will the Obama era be yet one more instance of the Democratic party not just grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory — but greedily grabbing off the whole jaw as well as America’s middle watches in shock?

FOOTNOTE: Obama has a press conference coming up. He has usually slated these during times when it seemed as if he needed to fight hard on an issue or if there were signs of his poll numbers slightly slipping.



4 Responses to “Obama’s Biggest Political Problem: Democrats?”

  1. GeorgeSorwell says:

    I appreciate what you're saying, there are other ways of looking at it. Here's one from Marc Ambinder:

    Nothing concentrates the (independent) mind like liberal interest group infighting, as David Brooks touts this morning…nothing except Republicans forcefully becoming the “party of no” and openly, vocally, and aggressively working to kill reform for (what seems to be) political purposes. Remember: the Democrats are still much more trusted as a party to fix health care (in the generic sense) that Republicans are. The public buys in to the urgency of the problem, even as they're not officially sold on any solution. What's now known in liberal circles as the “DeMint/Kristol” strategy is an instinctual Republican strategy derived from the gut; it misreads the public's ambivalence about Obama and the health care debate as a sign that the public has soured on health care reform in general (nope) or Democratic principles in particular (not really). It may well have the perverse effect of generating sympathy among independents for Obama. Independents want to get health care done; they respect Obama for trying, even as they've begun to sour on his leadership skills.

    I added some emphasis.

  2. casualobserver says:

    So, GeorgeSorwell, are you saying you are prepared to post a large cash wager in this forum that the independent voter will hand the Republican Party yet another comeuppance in the next election because this out-of-power, minority-numbered party prevented the White House and the majority party of both sections of Congress from getting anything done because they issued mean comments?

    You issued the same sort of declarations during the days leading up to the passage of the stimulus. Naive as I may be, I've yet to see any real fallout with voters over the Republican views of that legislation. In fact, I don't see your favorite liberal bloggers even going near the subject of late.

    You were also on the bandwagon on how Rush Limbaugh's comments in January were going to bring hell to pay by the Republican Party. Have you seen any evidence to support that in the current polls? So, I guess that means this will come back and bite them a year from now?

    While I'm no Marc Ambinder (whoever he may be), I think the independent voter will do what they have already shown they will do………..hold the administration and majority party responsible.

  3. kritt11 says:

    Great post, Joe!

    I remember how many on this board were afraid to have single party rule— but the fact is that the Democrats have never been as cohesive a group as the GOP. They constitute too many ethnic and interest groups to hand the president easy victories. Republicans- whether they admit it or not have become a largely white, heterosexual, wealthy, Christian party that is dominant only in the South.

    Democrats also received a large portion of the Independent vote, and many won in conservative districts that formerly elected Republicans. Those politicians still have to go home and face their constituents. Rubber stamping Obama's policies won't cut it in rural Virginia or North Carolina.

    Other recent Democratic presidents also had trouble with their own party when it came to getting their agenda through. LBJ had trouble with Southern Democrats over civil rights and liberal Democrats who were against the Vietnam War. Carter had problems with Democrats in the Senate like Ted Kennedy — who were to the left of him. Clinton struggled in his first 2 years with universal health care, gays in the military and gun control and ended up aiding the '94 GOP takeover of both houses of Congress.

  4. GeorgeSorwell says:

    Casualobserver–

    Naive as I may be, a large cash wager between pseudonyms is obviously never going to happen. Though I do appreciate your trust.

    I'm not going to predict what will happen in the next election because a lot of unpredictable things will happen between now and then. But the notion that Republicans will just benefit from any policy failures seems dubious to me.

    Obama's positives are going down, but Republicans aren't benefiting. Maybe because Republicans aren't doing anything?

© 2003-2011 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Mode Equity