Three things are apparent about the President of the United States after tonight’s State of the Union. He has JFK’s optimism. He has Bill Clinton’s penchant for going center-left and small-bore after losing a midterm election. And he has the spine of Jimmy Carter.
The president delivered a relatively subdued, Clintonian speech, filled with targeted policies to achieve specific ends, instead of seismic ideas that aim to remake the world. Obama’s economic plan going forward sounds as if it could have been devised by center-left, “New Economy” types like Tom Friedman and Fareed Zakaria. There was lots of talk about education, infrastructure, and expanding trade in a way that benefits the United States and increases our exports. On health care, the president is open to reforming his signature domestic achievement, and on foreign policy, Obama put forth a broad, generic blueprint that pretty much everyone could agree with (stay engaged in the world while cutting waste at the Pentagon; finish the job in the Middle East while also getting out of the Middle East in a timely manner).
But the area of the speech that really stood out, largely because it drew attention to the president’s weaknesses, was the manner in which he addressed the long-term debt issue. We’re going to “strengthen” Social Security. We’re going to hold costs down when it comes to Medicare. We’re going to cut spending where we can, so we are told. Of course, in order to do any of this, benefits are going to have to be reduced, programs are going to have to be eliminated, and Americans are going to find themselves with more skin in the game. But instead of giving Americans a bit of, dare I say, straight talk on this issue, the president addressed these issues as if he were asking the neighborhood bully to return his softball.
Over the course of the past two years, the president’s political capital has been waning among swing voters due to his apparent leftism. Tonight, the president corrected that problem, while adding another, equally damaging problem to his political brand. It was wise of Obama to back away from the Huffington Post Kool-Aid and adopt a more Clintonian tenor. But he also seems to have lost his mojo. Only the most ardent Obama supporters would be able to suggest with a straight face that this president demonstrated the courage to make the hard choices that the next president is going to have to make, especially given his refusal to even enumerate what those hard choices are going to be when addressing the subject. The Obama that the nation saw tonight was one who would gleefully sign legislation expanding funding for “clean energy,” but who would never have the fortitude to sign a bill raising the Social Security retirement age. Given the looming debt crisis, swing voters who were just beginning to once again warm up to the president may find themselves contemplating the Republican alternative.
January 25th, 2011 at 11:05 pm
Even as a Republican I was looking for Obama to help to continue uniting our country after the shootings in Tuscon, and frankly, I was disappointed and thought he was mediocre at best.
January 25th, 2011 at 11:08 pm
I was struck by the amount of rhetoric devoted to science & technology, remembrances of Sputnik, Apollo, education, and the importance of math, science, and engineering oriented education for national competitiveness. He was attempting to be a little bit JFK-like in tone. More importantly, I heard Obama talking directly to those independent voters in the suburbs. A category of voter that was largely responsible for the new Republican House and the voter group that is almost certain to decide the next presidential election.
January 25th, 2011 at 11:12 pm
I reckon we can put to rest any doubts we may have had about Obama running for reelection.
January 25th, 2011 at 11:17 pm
Yes, Chris, I agree that suburban swing voters will decide 2012.
To recap what I said in the previous thread, working class whites and seniors will stick with their 2010 support for the GOP, but as we saw last year, even with those voters, Republicans only win hard fought races in swing states by 2-3 points. In 2012, Hispanics, Asians, African-Americans, and voters under 30 will once again be activated, maybe not at 2008 levels, but certainly at levels greater than 2010. That will neutralize the GOP’s early bird special strategy.
That means that it’s all about the ‘burbs — suburbs and exurbs. Those 100 fastest growing counties that elected Bush in 2004 are places to watch, as are key suburbs in the Philly area, Denver, etc. I have no faith that the GOP will do any serious outreach to minorities this time around. It will be largely white suburban voters who decide the election.
January 25th, 2011 at 11:23 pm
I think Dave is right in some respects about Obama’s lack of spine. Remember, this is Senator Present we’re talking about here- the Narcissist in Chief who above all things desires to be loved and adorned. No way this guy could tell the American people “no.”
On the other hand, every time he tries to be the tough guy- Cambridge cop, BP oil spill, demagoging Republicans- he comes across ridiculous and his ratings drop. Both parties are in a tricky spot. Republicans have to satiate the TP and reach out to swing voters while being sorta responsible for what happens in Washington. Obama must spend money like there is no tomorrow (it’s in his blood and his union contract), all while feigning concern over the debt. He must placate HuffPo without alienating those same swing voters the Republicans want, while being mostly responsible for what happens in Washington.
January 25th, 2011 at 11:28 pm
DaveG—
Yes, it will be white suburban voters and mostly educated white suburban voters. That’s why I think there was so much science and math education talk as those themes resonate with that class of voter. Obama and the Dems may be speculating that the Republicans may come across as “anti-science” as they did in the GWB years, or that at least they can be made to appear that way to their detriment.
January 26th, 2011 at 12:10 am
There’s no doubt Obama believes in education, but he didn’t mention teacher’s unions, tenure, lack of choice, or any of the constraints that have kept us on a downward trajectory in educational outcomes.
He talked about the need to get people employed, but didn’t talk about incentivizing American companies to repatriate profits earned overseas by eliminating double taxation. He talked about allowing American companies to expense investment for one year, but didn’t propose extending that time-frame so as to encourage longer-term investment.
He boldly declared he would veto any bill hitting his desk that included earmarks, without owning up to the fact that Republicans aren’t going to send him any legislation with earmarks in it. Since the House appropriates all funding, and has outlawed earmarks, Obama’s applause line didn’t amount to much.
At no time did he sound desperate to get our fiscal trainwreck about to happen stopped in its tracks. He needed to to sound credible.
January 26th, 2011 at 1:50 am
Tuned in…heard about high speed rail and green jobs…tuned out.
January 26th, 2011 at 2:52 am
Ryan good, Bachmann pathetic.
January 26th, 2011 at 7:51 am
Didn’t Obama say 3 years ago on the campaign trail that he would veto any bill with earmarks?
Has he yet?
January 26th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
‘Over the course of the past two years, the president’s political capital has been waning among swing voters…’
Which explains why is approval rating has been climbing ever since the midterm, especially among swing voters. Oh, wait…..