Obama's new Cief of Staff: Left agenda doesn't have America's support

[JeffL]

Well, this will be interesting. Obama chose a Chicago Daley, William, a major Wall Street insider, as his new chief of staff. And Daley has stated "We must acknowledge that the left's agenda has not won the support of a majority of Americans — and, based on that recognition, we must steer a more moderate course."

Fascinating,

[Timex]

It's a pretty slick move, in that it difuses most of the Right's attacks on Obama. It's hard for them to continue to characterize his administration as ultra-liberal.

[Xerapis]

Their characterizations require no basis in reality.

OMG! More Chicago politics! Can't believe a word those guys say! They're just trying to lull us into complacency so they can continue to advance their radical liberal agenda.

Did you know this is the most corrupt administration in American history?

[Kurdel]

Source?

And this hardly surprises me, just look at the Obama pandering to the right over the last two years. That his administration wants it in his PR is more surprising IMO.

But who are Obama supporters in 2011 anyways? Isn't more honest to say it's anti-republicans rather than pro-democrats?

[Xerapis]

What I just heard: Don't expect us to try to repeal DOMA for at least 2 more years.

[jeffd]

Keep in mind that the Chief of Staff's job generally isn't to formulate policy, its to execute on the president's agenda. Daley has a reputation as a guy who gets things done.

Rahm Emannuel had a similar political outlook as Daley, when he got into policy fights he lost more than he won.

[jeffd]

Oh and Xerapis: the reason doma is going nowhere is the gop majority in the house. You could resurrect LBJ and make him chief of staff and you still would get no action on DOMA out of the house.

[jeffd]

Here is EJ Dionne saying it better than me: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/bill_daley_is_it_about_compete.html

[Xerapis]

Oh and Xerapis: the reason doma is going nowhere is the gop majority in the house. You could resurrect LBJ and make him chief of staff and you still would get no action on DOMA out of the house.

I said TRY. As in, make visible attempts to initiate action.

I fully expect them, after making statements like that, not to TRY.

Zero attempts made. No effort. Giving up before the battle starts because they already decided they can't win.

[jeffd]

They haven't decided they can't win. They can't win. There's a difference.

[Xerapis]

It's still a decision.

If you don't try to fight because you're certain you can't win, that is called DECIDING YOU CAN'T WIN.

It isn't certain, because you didn't fucking fight. The only way to know you can't win is if you fully commit yourself to the battle and lose.

Anything else is a decision.

Yes, you have to pick and choose your battles. And sometimes you need to fight even when you're pretty damn sure you're gonna lose. Because fighting is the right thing to do. Because you promised to fight.

And because some of us are actively being fucked over by the fact that you're not fighting and winning.

[Joe M.]

They decided they couldn't win on anything liberals care about even when they had majorities. While the country may or may not support the left agenda, liberals certainly won't be supporting Obama. I believe they call this "one and done" in sports parlance.

[Black Isis]

They decided they couldn't win on anything liberals care about even when they had majorities. While the country may or may not support the left agenda, liberals certainly won't be supporting Obama. I believe they call this "one and done" in sports parlance.

While I'm disappointed with some of the places Obama has fallen short the last two years, it's pretty hard to say they couldn't win on anything liberals care about. Health care, financial reform, repeal of DADT, etc...a lot of these have been kind of half measures and taken a while, but keep in mind that progress on health care has been stalled for the better part of four decades, so...

[Lorini]

They decided they couldn't win on anything liberals care about even when they had majorities. While the country may or may not support the left agenda, liberals certainly won't be supporting Obama. I believe they call this "one and done" in sports parlance.

They have NO choice in 2012. Zero, zilch, nada. Hillary is not going to run and there's no one else out there who the Dems are going to support. And if Palin, Bachmann, Lou (forgot his last name but he's the birther guy from CNN), or any other Republican looney runs in the general, they'll be voting for Obama out of terror.

[AndrewM]

Lou Dobbs? He's actually on Fox now, not CNN.

There was some speculation that Obama was dumping the previous guy to "push the reset button" on relations with the left, but I guess not!

[unbongwah]

It's a pretty slick move, in that it difuses most of the Right's attacks on Obama. It's hard for them to continue to characterize his administration as ultra-liberal.
At what point were the Right's attacks on Obama based on, like, facts? Because I think I must've blinked and missed it.

[Eric T Cheng]

At what point were the Right's attacks on Obama based on, like, facts? Because I think I must've blinked and missed it.

Isn't it a fact that President Obama was born in Kenya?

[RepoMan]

No matter how bad the left thinks Obama is, they still think the right is worse. Much, much, much, much, much worse. The number of lefties who will defect from Obama to, oh, I don't know, Nader (or even to "abstain"), is going to be too low to matter in 2012. My hunch, anyway.

[Kurdel]

At what point were the Right's attacks on Obama based on, like, facts? Because I think I must've blinked and missed it.

What is he doing about the New Black Panthers?

http://scottystarnes.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/obama-black-power-ice-cream.jpg?w=500&h=314

And you are right RepoMan, I am willing to bet Obama will not lose a single vote in the coming election. Especially if the Republicans go forward with one of the crazies instead of a level headed candidate like lol just kidding, they are all nuts.

[Jeremy Johnsen]

I can't imagine a single Republican candidate that is being talked about right now that would get me to cast a vote for them over Obama. It doesn't matter how underwhelmed I am with him, "President Huckabee" or "President Palin" just isn't going to convince me to vote for the current GOP.

I guess a lot can happen in the next six months, but I'm not at all impressed with the group they have now.

[maxle]

I grew up and became politically aware during the Bush years. It'll take divine intervention for me to vote for any GOP candidate for anything ever. I mostly feel contempt for the Democrats, but I actively hate the GOP.

[Hechicera]

The question isn't whether Obama is "better" than whatever the Republicans end up running. The question is are liberals upset enough and non-right-wing independents jaded enough by Obama's tack to the center that they don't bother to show up and vote. Or, if they do show, vote a protest vote, or refuse to fill in that race.

Some lot of the votes "for" Republicans in the midterm were non_Republicans "trying to teach the Dems a lesson". The lesson wasn't "be more right" it was "help me dammit". When they realize neither party will they will vote how?

[hong]

I keep reading that as "Obama's new Clef of Staff".

[Woolen Horde]

I keep reading that as "Obama's new Clef of Staff".

Did someone say Cleef of Staff?

http://spockvideo.com/images/mastermainpic.jpg

[Lorini]

The GOP can win if they put up some candidate like Jindal in Loisianna because the disenchanted liberal base may not see him as much of a threat (although the antebellum backdrops have to go). Fun times n 2012!

[John Many Jars]

I grew up and became politically aware during the Bush years. It'll take divine intervention for me to vote for any GOP candidate for anything ever. I mostly feel contempt for the Democrats, but I actively hate the GOP.

There's hope for the youth!

[Dan_Theman]

The GOP can win if they put up some candidate like Jindal in Loisianna because the disenchanted liberal base may not see him as much of a threat (although the antebellum backdrops have to go). Fun times n 2012!
Possibly - his "coming out party" was absolutely disasterous. While it hurt him in the popularity contest portion of campaiging, that doesn't make him a less able politician and someone with skill could compensate given enough time and opportunity. It will be interesting to see how things resolve over the next year.

[JeffL]

Well, the one thing we've proved on this forum is that we can't pick the nominee of either party until, well, the primaries are essentially over. ;)

That said, it is fun to speculate. My two cents is that Palin and Huckabee won't be serious candidates. Palin just can't pass the "Not Airhead" test - and the Tea Party people may be enough to put some local candidates into Congress but they aren't enough nationally to put a Palin in place. Huckabee is actually too smart to make another run - he got his national attention, his radio spots, etc. so he may run just to keep his brand up, but I don't think even he expects to be the nominee.

I'm guessing that Mitt Romney will be unable to overcome his looking and sounding like a used car salesman (phony.) He has a great story - Gov of Mass, came in with a $3 Billion deficit and raised taxes on corporations by eliminating loopholes and cut spending and left with a big surplus, which is the kind of stuff that will resonate with voters, but he needs a better "handler." Pawlenty (sp?) from Minnesota may be interesting. Crist is also interesting, though he may have a hard time getting through the primaries, since they are typically controlled by the more extreme idealogues and he has taken some stands that many would consider more liberal (such as his stand on greenhouse gasses.)

[Jason McCullough]

On paper, Romney should be fantastic. Him signing the MA health care bill which is largely the same as the Obama one is practically an automatic disqualification though; no idea how he survives the primary attacks based on that.

[Hechicera]

Huckabee has pissed off someone with money on the hard theological right a couple years back. I remember mentioning the hate-mails on the conservative homeschool mailing list when it happened. Weird since he was their darling before that. Active hatred from that bucket of GOP money will rule him out I think. That money still supports Romney. Inside the Beltway hates Palin, full stop.

The ultra-conservative Catholics I know (and there is a lot of donor money there) support Romney over Jindal. Which I find interesting since the NOLA area diocese all but says "God wants you to vote for Jindal." I'd say that's his core base in LA. Seeing that a Mormon has more appeal than Jindal does to the non-NOLA area ultra-conservative Catholics, I'd call him toast too. And Romney has the money connections from his profession too, Jindal has cute shots of him hunting in the bayous with lotsa white guys. I'd bet on money and connections over folksy photos and the ability to muster only one diocese worth of active support of your religions conservatives.

The only issue with the GOP nomination for Romney is he is the hands on favorite right now with any non-evangelicals and the hands-on 1 1/2 years out rarely is the winner. All the evangelicals are so pro-Palin, they'll probably write her in, and Romney has already decided to throw the southern evangelicals off his bus (as they hate him anyway no loss). Romney has also run in Mass. and has practice trying to look like a "moderate Republican". If people identifying as that base that can still vote in Republican primaries outnumber the evangelicals (dunno?) he has a stronger shot.

[Lorini]

Palin quit the governorship of Alaska. No way she can win.

[unbongwah]

I mostly feel contempt for the Democrats, but I actively hate the GOP.
This is what most liberals feel like every day.

came in with a $3 Billion deficit and raised taxes on corporations by eliminating loopholes and cut spending and left with a big surplus
Bill Clinton is making another comeback?