Posted on 11/07/2012 9:22:59 AM PST by SeekAndFind
In the aftermath of any victory, presidential candidates proclaim a new mandate to move forward on the values of their campaign. Barack Obama will probably be no different, but National Journal's Ron Fournier warns that claiming a mandate after this election would be politically dangerous --- and a fantasy:
Barack Obama won a second term but no mandate. Thanks in part to his own small-bore and brutish campaign, victory guarantees the president nothing more than the headache of building consensus in a gridlocked capital on behalf of a polarized public.
If the president begins his second term under any delusion that voters rubber-stamped his agenda Tuesday night, he is doomed to fail.
Mandates are rarely won on Election Night. They are earned after Inauguration Day by leaders who spend their political capital wisely, taking advantage of events without overreaching. Obama is capable – as evidenced by his first-term success with health care reform. But mandate-building requires humility, a trait not easily associated with him.
“The mandate is a myth,” said John Altman, associate professor of political science at York College of Pennsylvania. “But even if there was such a thing as a mandate, this clearly isn’t an election that would produce one.”
He pointed to Obama’s small margin of victory and the fact that U.S. voters are divided deeply by race, gender, spirituality and party affiliation. You can’t claim to be carrying out the will of the people when the populous has little shared will.
Fournier has this most correct in his initial thought. In order to claim a mandate, one has to have run on clear, positive values. The only real takeaway from the Obama campaign was that Mitt Romney was too extreme or too willing to change to be President, which doesn’t leave much of a positive basis for Obama to claim a mandate. The first appearance of even the skeleton of a second-term agenda came 567 days into the campaign, and that consisted of vague pledges to stick to the status quo.
Furthermore, this was the unique re-election where an incumbent President did slightly worse than his first election. Obama lost two states he won, and the popular-vote margin will be narrower on a percentage basis than in 2008. That doesn’t equate to a ringing vote of confidence in Obama’s agenda; in fact, it sounds a bit like a warning that a second term had better produce more than the first.
Perhaps Obama understood that last night. His victory speech didn’t hail a mandate, but instead focused rhetorically on the need for better solutions from everyone across the board. How long will that last? We’ll see, but shortly after his last victory, Obama didn’t hesitate to tell Republicans to get used to the fact that “I won.” Perhaps he learned a lesson from that, but it wouldn’t have come from winning his next election.
The Chicago Tribune notes that Obama may not have learned the lesson at all:
“You made your voice heard,” Obama said in his acceptance speech, signaling that he believes the bulk of the country is behind his policies. It’s a sticking point for House Republicans, sure to balk at that.
The same voters who gave Obama four more years in office also elected a divided Congress, sticking with the dynamic that has made it so hard for the president to advance his agenda. Democrats retained control of the Senate; Republicans kept their House majority.
Here’s Obama’s full speech from last night:
The words Mandate and Obama do not belong in the same sentence.
The word “mandate,” the concept of “mandate,” will go into the memory hole for at least the next four years.
He doesn’t need a mandate. He has the power, the media, the Senate, his executive orders, the military, and he does not feel constrained by our “living” (i.e. dead) Constitution.
How long will it be until we see his Civilian Security force as large and well-funded as the US military?
Not at 50% of the vote. If this were a parlimentary system there would be a runoff
As it turns out, we're a population of asswipes.
I'd suggest quitting your jobs and hastening the collapse.
Doesn’t matter. He has the power that’s all that matters to him. He has shown a willingness to disregard the law, bypass Congress and do whatever he thinks is best. His second term will be marked by more of this lawless behavior and I believe to an even greater degree
“The words Mandate and Obama do not belong in the same sentence.”
How about the words, “I WON”? That will slip out at the first sign of any opposition to husseins master plan and just before he signs a slew of executive orders.
Agreed. Obama can do what ever the heck he wants at this point. He is not going to be elected again, the press is going to give him a pass, so there is no reason for him to be restrained.
According to our Constitution he is President. Not sure where “mandate” is mentioned in said document.
I have never understood the idea of a mandate.
Why 55% should give an elected official significantly greater legitimacy than 50.1% is beyond me.
There is an expected way that our government should function. There are things the executive branch can do, and there are things that it is not allowed to do. And I think all of that is out the window. Obama will get what Obama wants.
Perception determines reality in a post-modern world in which there are no absolutes. Obama has whatever mandate the mainstream media says he does. The media will say America wrote him a blank check to do his will, and the GOP will be silenced.
Obama could care less what anybody thinks but himself.
And if anyone thinks that Boner will resist him, I have a bridge to sell him. We won the House again, but there aren’t enough Tea Partiers to control the votes, and most of the Tea Party congressmen are second termers at best, so the usual suspects will reappoint the same tired, corrupt leadership, and there aren’t enough votes to stop them.
Yes.
The takers who will vote outnumber the makers. This situation won’t improve in the next 4 years. Not only does Obama have a mandate, his successor, a Democrat, will have a mandate too. That is, until the whole thing goes toes up.
Does it matter?
“The words Mandate and Obama do not belong in the same sentence.”
Why, sure they do. But the first is two separate words, “Man Date”. Else why was Presidential Bodyman Reggie Love part of the entourage.
Vote fractions in CA, MA, VT, etc. certainly say so.
Look at the mess of an economy he is going to inherit.
It's even worse than the one he inherited from Bush.
But that doesn’t matter to the idiots who voted for him as long as he gives them our money!
He’ll think he does and,as a result,he won’t give a rat’s hindquarters what “bigoted” people say about him or what “biased” polls say about him in a second term.Get ready,boys and girls,to find out what Osama *really* thinks of “the 1%”.
Yes. Conversion of the USA to a socialist state and it’s absorption into the Islamic Empire. Sharia soon to follow with legalization of gay marriage (so sharia can be enorced to legally kill Americans) and drug use so that The People are too doped up and apathetic to stop changes to the Constituion - 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments which will greatly increase his power base. Installation of New World Order and implementation of the mark of the beast Obamacare implants. All for the good of the people of course...
: )
Exactly so. Do dictators worry about trivial things like mandates?
Someone beat me to the Reggie Love joke...
Seriously, though, anyone who even remotely thinks the guy whose whole campaign boiled down to “Republicans are the devil!” and who shut out Republicans for the last four years is going to be Mr. Bipartisan all of a sudden is a complete idiot. Which means the liberals all do believe it.
Yes he does.
After 4 years, everyone knew exactly what Obama stood for:
1) a larger federal government
2) Keyneasin economic policies
3) government backed businesses
4) the federal government micro-managing entire industries
5) clean/green energy (and killing fossil fuels)
6) higher taxes on the rich and business
7) expanding government benefits
He was reelected with all that front and center.
On the other hand, the GOP-D is shell-shocked. Romney was their perfect candidate, and he lost. They are abandoning the idea that they can win with conservative ideas, and are already talking about moving to the left.
The result of this election is a political setup like they have in Europe:
1) a far left party (Democrat)
2) a “conservative” party that is slightly left of center (GOP).
As a practical matter, there will be no major “conservative” party in the USA, just a liberal and a very-liberal party.
I don’t know what to do, or what our answer should be, but we’ve got to start by facing reality. And, the reality is the Reagan revolution (at least at the federal level) died yesterday—and so did the GOP (they just don’t know it yet).
It will be interesting to see how long it takes for him and Hillary to go at each others throats.
I am interested because the term "mandate" implies strong popular support.
mandate, ARF, why because blacks voted in their masses due to their racism.
Because layabout lazy welfare, food stamp trash voted to keep their freebies coming.
Because th emedia ignored fast and furious, Libya, border agent being killed, solyndra, debt, unemployment, homosexual agenda, money wasted, and they were always bias and corrupt.
He;s got an agenda and to know what it is then read the commie papers of 1963, he;s already done half of that
The greater the margin of victory, the more it signals a public sentiment in favor of the winner and his agenda. With a large enough margin of victory, even minority members of Congress will go along with the President in order to protect their own seats against public backlash back home (at least those who don't have "safe" seats).
mandate, ARF, why because blacks voted in their masses due to their racism.
Because layabout lazy welfare, food stamp trash voted to keep their freebies coming.
Because th emedia ignored fast and furious, Libya, border agent being killed, solyndra, debt, unemployment, homosexual agenda, money wasted, and they were always bias and corrupt.
He;s got an agenda and to know what it is then read the commie papers of 1963, he;s already done half of that
SINCE WHEN DOES A MANDATE MATTER TO A DICTATOR???
I heard them discussing this on Fox last night.
This is why we are losing. Eggheads are in the deep weeds fighting the last war, when Obama is invading Poland and Czechoslovakia, so to speak.
WAKE UP. IT’S A WHOLE NEW WORLD!!!
Interesting,,I wonder what role the press will play now? I know he’ll dictate it,,just wonder what their marching orders will be.
It’s clear though, the U.S. press works for Obama and no one else.
He doesn’t care if he has a mandate or not.
He won.
Exactly what I am doing. Turning 62 in December, and have already applied for my SS. Could easily have kept working, but have no desire to support communism. Turned off the satelite TV service a few weeks ago, and my only source of news or communication is the internet.
LOL..! I needed that today!
I don’t think it matters. Obama can now do most anything he wants, and he will.
We didn’t just lose an election, we lost relevance, we lost our country.
I understand why the idea exists. It just doesn’t seem to me that 55 out of 100 really indicates a significantly greater degree of public support than 51 out of 100.
But I also realize most people don’t agree with me.
And the slavering, drooling masses glued to their telescreens will parrot it in mindless unison. They will proclaim it double-plus good.
And all who say otherwise are Racis'.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahaha!!!
You foolish silly-person!
Whatever makes you think that the "Constitution" (that outmoded document written by dead white slave-owners) has any meaning in this modern utopia?
FORWARD!!!!
It presumes a world where 40% of the public would support anything with a -D after its name and 40% would support anything with an -R.
Under that view, it's not 51/100 vs. 55/100, but 11/20 (55%) vs 15/20 (75%), which is a much more meaningful result.
He has all the “mandate” he wants. He can now rule by fiat. He started openly using that power already and the congress did not object.Some Republicans objected to the purposes of the fiats but they did not object to the president’s right to use them. Ergo, thus and therefore the Constitution and Congress are no longer important parts of our system of government. They now exist only for formality and the illusion that the USA is still a republic. It is not. Analagous to the Romans, we have made the transition from Republic to Empire, or rather, to despotism that may turn out to be empire. This would be true, even if Romney had won. Once the presidency has used fiat successfully it becomes a part of the Presidency. The election passing without Fiat even being an issue of the election ensures that result.
He turned the election into a referendum on Big Bird. The only thing he has a mandate for is to save Big Bird.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.