Posted on 09/10/2010 3:37:28 AM PDT by tlb
If the Democrats lose ... there may be a ray of sunshine for President Obama.
A president forced to deal with the opposition party in Congress can actually end up more successful and more popular.
Remember President Clinton's experience post-1994 deluge. He was disappointed for a while, but then he found he was, in many ways, liberated from following the agenda of the most liberal base of his party.
President Clinton was forced to work with, and at times painfully forced to compromise with the Republicans.
The result of Bill Clinton being forced to sit down with Republicans and work out compromises was a balanced budget and $1 trillion surplus and a 65 percent job approval rating on Jan. 20, 2001 his last day in office.
So don't be surprised that, if the Democrats lose the House or God forbid the Senate too this November 2010, the end result could be a boon and gift of independence for President Barack Obama from following, or at least being heavily influenced by, Democratic congressional majorities and the liberal blogosphere and organizations such as MoveOn, which hammered him over the last two years for not being liberal enough.
Obama can return to and actually practice the approach to governance that was the core message of his campaign and contributed mightily to his victory in 2008.
There is not a red America or a blue America, but rather, a United States of America.
So out of the deluge, if there is one, President Obama may be able to convince the Republicans, who are no longer the opposition party and now might be blamed for the country's unsolved economic and social problems and the budget deficits: It's time to put aside hyper-partisan politics and get back into the solutions business.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
It won't work if the Republicans actually follow through and use their majority as the voters intend, instead of allowing the media and other enemies to bully them into "compromise" and "power sharing".
“The Clinton example is legitimate. “
No it’s not.
Clinton, although a bumbling fool, was at least likable to some number of delusional Americans. King obuma is a totalitarian loudmouth who spews racial and class warfare. He exudes hate and division from every pore of his body.
Obuma is an anachronism out of his time and place. He would have been in his element running around in the bush during the 1950s and recruiting half-naked peasants for the communist Mau-Mau. He is operating from a 1930’s Marxist playbook and counting on a non-existent proletariat to rise up and revolt. Instead, he’s seeing the emergence of a large and angry middle class and is too stupid to see it.
And no, king obuma doesn’t have and will never have a “force as big as and as well equipped as the Army.” That’s just delusion speaking. He looks like “little boy lost” trying to use Sun Tzu’s techniques. Fat welfare mommas and streetcorner punks who can’t hold a glock straight will never do well on a battlefield. Hell, they won’t even show up.
“The Clinton example is legitimate.”
I might have believed that Obamao could turn the corner, until this past week!
When Obamao decided to ask for $50billion more stimulus dollars when the $1.3TRILLION stimulus didn’t work, that tells me this guy knows only one way to govern: as an ideologue!
There is no corner to turn with Obamao! Not only that, there is NO WAY the American people are going to be snookered into voting for this unknown guy again! The REASON he was electable in the first place is because he was an “unknown!” NOW that the American people KNOW him (through his actions), they will NOT vote for this idiot again!
Get over yourself Lanny. Obama is not popular and there is never a ray of sunshine remotely near him.
Won’t happen: Clinton was a DLC-type. He campaigned as an actual centrist on a mixture of left and right ideas, so he had something to work with the GOP on, and we got welfare reform, decent trade policy, and a budget surplus. Obama campaigned as a “centrist” by presenting himself as a Rorschach test onto which voters could project whatever they wanted, but plainly has no ideas except loony left ideas, and doesn’t even seem to have any friends or colleagues with anything but loony left ideas to advise him.
Consider for a moment: do not the czars all have authority that has been detached from actual Secretaries? If so, then those Secretaries, who are accountable to Congress, are still required to answer for whatever the czars do, in their name or otherwise. Therefore, it seems to me that Republican committee chairpeople could haul the Secretaries up and ask them probing questions about the czars’ activities. The answers might well be very instructive and might provide the lever needed to pry the closet cabinet out of the WH.
Yes, but only because the opposition party was in sync with the American public and Clinton was smart enough to deal with them.
Does anyone think that Obama is that smart? Is there anyone in his cabinet who is? Extremists are extreme and there is no middle ground.
The phrase “whistling past the graveyard” comes to mind.
Spot on the Hill is a no fly zone about Obama win.
I wrote:
Itd only work if Obama can move to the center.
Which is something I *HIGHLY* doubt.
So why'd you ignore the second of only two sentences to post on only my first? Geez....
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.