Obama’s False Assumption:
That by power of his presence,
he could make Americans more supportive of big government
That by power of his presence,
he could make Americans more supportive of big government
Perhaps Barack Obama’s biggest failure as President was (as I have argued before) the same as George H.W. Bush’s: he misread his mandate. The incumbent accelerated his fall from grace by so quickly reversing course on so many of the campaign promises he made which helped secure his support among moderate voters.
And there’s something else.
He assumed that by the combination of his personality and the crisis of the times, he could shift the national mood in the direction of his long-held far left beliefs.
Pointing out that Obama won because he won independents by a margin 12 points larger than that John Kerry enjoyed in 2004, Steve Chapman writes that in the election last fall (as in 1952) while Americans “weren’t inviting a radical turnabout — just some modest improvements in the status quo,”
. . . the 44th president apparently thought he had a mandate for the expansion of federal power and responsibility, which he has used on everything from bailing out automakers to showering the economy with stimulus dollars to trying to overhaul health insurance. He and his allies have therefore been surprised to face a surge of angry opposition, including some based on wild flights of paranoia.
What they forgot is that the surest way to mobilize American political opposition, irrational as well as rational, is to enlarge the government’s role in our lives.
(H/t: Jennifer Rubin.)
And poll after poll after poll after poll shows that more Americans prefer private sector solutions to public ones. Despite the president’s evident charm and presence, he has not been able to cause them to change their minds. Indeed, if anything, he has helped intensify the level of opposition to government solutions, reinforcing our commitment to freedom.
12 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I think you are too generous by far. I think he thought he could bamboozle the American people. And he has not given up trying by any means.
Comment by American Elephant — September 1, 2009 @ 2:24 am - September 1, 2009
He’s a deer in the headlights.
Just wait until his base starts really chafing over Afganistan. I read that Feingold has already demanded withdrawal timetables.
Maybe the Tea Parties and Code Pink will be able to co-rent venues to save on the deposit?
Best wishes,
-MFS
Comment by MFS — September 1, 2009 @ 7:12 am - September 1, 2009
Dan, I think there’s a typo in your headline, no?
You really meant “…by the power of all his presents”, right? Like $4500 for Joe Blow’s clunker, TARP, Stimulus giveaways that can’t be given fast enough, BigPharma concessions and now a likely $750-1,000 for Joe Blow’s bad frig, washer or dryer?
Presents… not presence. I doubt a ghostbuster could detect Obama’s “presence” –he’s all smoke… and some mirrors when needed.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — September 1, 2009 @ 8:02 am - September 1, 2009
Liberalism is all smoke and mirrors. Wishin and hopin. Feel good, “we tried”, “we’re hopin….”
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 1, 2009 @ 8:44 am - September 1, 2009
I want to assert once again that the Government should be concerned with its citizens’ prosperity not its own expansion. All the time that representatives spend discussing useless laws should instead be spent finding ways that government red tape interrupts its citizens daily lives. I dont want more paperwork so that the government can hire more people to process it while acquiring more benefits. Case in point – State Representatives in California get $175 stipends a day for help with buying their meals…WTF??? I dont get a stipend at work to help me buy my meals. They also get money to buy cars so they can drive to Sacramento…WTF??? I dont get help buying my car so I can drive to work. Then, they have the nerve to “vote” on whether or not to establish a Blue Berry Commission to do what??? Humm…hire their friends to be on it at around $100,000 a year…I dont think so. And they wonder why the State is bankrupt.
Comment by Killiteten - Native Intelligence — September 1, 2009 @ 9:31 am - September 1, 2009
Big Government also means big bailouts to connected companies: Obama regime to bail out British Booze company with $2.7 Billion in taxpayer dollars/Chinese debt.
Comment by V the K — September 1, 2009 @ 12:25 pm - September 1, 2009
#5 Native Intel is like me. I yern for the day when my President isn’t on tv six times a day telling us how he’s going to change things, make things better for the “average American”. Lordy, just leave me alone. Reagan said it best. Govenment is part of the problem, he spent a lot of his time getting government out of the way. So Americans could themselves, be great again.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 1, 2009 @ 2:52 pm - September 1, 2009
I’m not sure it’s healthy for humans to feel they aren’t in control of their own lives. Individual responsibility seems like a healthier state of mind.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 1, 2009 @ 2:53 pm - September 1, 2009
More bad news for Obamanomics. For August, despite the cash for clunkers program that cost our children and grand children another $3 billion…..
GM sales MINUS 20% government owned and operated
Chrysler sales MINUS 20% govenment owned and operated
Ford privately owned and operated PLUS 20%
hmmm why the wild swing in results? 40% difference. Rumors were that conservatives and independents were staying away from “govenment run motor companies.”
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9AELOCO0&show_article=1
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 1, 2009 @ 2:59 pm - September 1, 2009
The next brewing Obama scandal.
The release of the terrorist al-Megrahi.
What did Obama know and when did he know it.
Did Obama agree with the Brits and Scots releasing the terrorist.
Did Obama see the welcome home ceremony and what did he think of it.
What would President Obama say to the 200 surviving family members of the Pan Am flight.
Can we get the reaction of the families on tv please.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 1, 2009 @ 3:06 pm - September 1, 2009
According to Politico, Obama’s drop in the polls “could soon be among the worst early poll numbers for a modern American president”.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0909/Historically_Obamas_fall_is_fast.html
Comment by John — September 1, 2009 @ 10:47 pm - September 1, 2009
#11: “According to Politico, Obama’s drop in the polls “could soon be among the worst early poll numbers for a modern American president”.”
…and the least reported.
Comment by Sean A — September 2, 2009 @ 1:34 am - September 2, 2009