In a new poll published by USA Today ("Obama supported on guns, debt" by Susan Page, USA Today, Thursday, February 21, 2013), a clear majority of Americans agree with the President over Congressional Republicans on every major issue. Gun control? Check. Environment? Check. The economy? Check.
That's right. Each of these crucial issues favors the approach by President Obama over that of the established Republican elites.
According to this poll, a majority of Americans support President Obama more than they support Congressional Republicans. Here is the specific breakdown in numbers published in the report:
Federal Deficit - Obama's Approach 45%, Congressional Republican's Approach 38%
Guns - Obama's Approach 45%, Congressional Republican's Approach 39%
Immigration - Obama's Approach 50%, Congressional Republican's Approach 33%
Climate Change - Obama's Approach 47%, Congressional Republican's Approach 26%
If the President truly means what he says, particularly what he said in his unusually forceful Second Inaugural Address, then the time to act is now. Not later, when it might be more politically profitable. Now.
After all, the President does not have to worry about a next time for his own political ambitions. Once you are a two-term President, that’s pretty much it. The rest of his life, he will adjust to being a former President.
Former Presidents seem often to speak truer about their feelings than they did when they were President. Carter, in his post-Presidency, has been amazing. So amazing, that his post-Presidency is often recognized as the most successful post-Presidential career in history. Clinton, too, seems to have become more forthright and honest – less political – in his post-Presidential years.
Carter and Clinton both have been refreshing and candid voices at times since their departure from the highest office in the land. But each time they are – and this is particularly true in the case of Clinton – it’s hard not to be reminded that their time as President of the United States often was far more reserved and politically prudent. Clinton in particular was a political creature. It often seemed that there was no underlying agenda, or even ideology of any sort, governing them, or leading the way. Instead, the President and his team almost seemed to take things as they came, individually, and to try to win individual battles and then utilize these for effective soundbites in future debates and speeches. But it was not exactly what I would call a vision.
Yet, since Clinton left office, his clarity in expressing his political vision seems to have grown much sharper. Perhaps it is this that led him to the passage of much of the greatly touted environmental legislation, a great deal of which was passed in the final 72 hours of his Presidency. Eight years in office, and the environment was such a priority that he waited until the final three days of an eight year term to pass some impressive environmental legislation knowing the whole while that one of the first things that Bush would do when he took over was to strike these down. That’s not a vision. That’s political opportunism.
This has been even more magnified since Clinton left office. While there was a difference between President Carter and ex-President Carter, these are not as glaringly obvious as the differences between President Clinton and ex-President Clinton. The problem with that is that it is too late. They both may hold a certain sway, but they are no longer the current President.
Right now, Obama is the President. This is his time. He needs to make the most of it, and do what he said he would. I don’t want to hear him talking five years from now, ten years, twenty years from now, and saying all of the right things, and wondering where that man was while he occupied the White House. If you believe in something, like climate change, this is the time to get something significant done in terms of legislation. Not later. What better time than now, while President? Look at the numbers. A majority support the President on immigration. A majority support the President on gay marriage and gay rights in general. A majority support the President on gun control. But the widest majority favors the President on climate change and, presumably, would support legislative efforts to address this.
With the severe nature of some of the storms that we have seen in recent years, such as Katrina and Sandy (to name the most famous example of severe storms that hit the United States), people finally are coming around to an understanding that this really is not normal, and that, indeed, whether or not we like it, human beings and their activities apparently are having an impact on the climate. And not for the better, either.
Given that the Republicans have more or less controlled the political climate in the United States since the so-called "Reagan Revolution" of the early 1980's, even despite setbacks. Reagan dominated the political landscape in the eighties like few ever have, and so powerful was this impression, that Republicans have been looking for the "next" Reagan ever since January 20, 1989, when Reagan finally left the White House for the final time as President.
Of course, George W. Bush became President, and Republicans continued to be the "winners" right up until 1992, when Clinton won the Presidency, and the Democrats won the Congress. It seemed like change was at hand.
Two short years later, however, came the so-called "Republican Revolution" of 1994, also sometimes referred to as the "Gingrich Revolution", and the whole "Contract for America" (which I once heard referred to as the Contract on America". After a brief, tow year hiatus, the Republicans once again seemed to control the political climate, even if they did not occupy the White House. I once heard that Clinton was roaming the halls of the White House, talking to himself, or more perhaps muttering to himself, on that fateful election night in 1994.
But the Republicans actually screwed up their popularity, for once, and Clinton was soundly reelected in 1996. A majority of Americans blamed the government shut down following a showdown with President Clinton on Republicans. Clinton won with ease, although he had to work with a Republican Congress for the last six years of his Presidency. Many Republicans still feel that any success that the nation enjoyed with the balanced budget was due to Republicans, not Clinton or the Democrats.
Of course, then came 2000, and Bush took power in a disputed election. That, plus the Republicans essentially had a majority in both the House and the Senate, as well as in the Supreme Court. They were completely dominant at that point, and had the run of the place, almost undisputed, until the 2006 election. We had September 11th, the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, tons of scandals with both the White House and the Congress, the re-election of George W. Bush and a solid majority of Republicans for both the 2002 and 2004 Congressional elections, and the botched Hurricane Katrina relief efforts, before people finally turned away from Republicans a little bit in 2006. Of course, they still had a majority in almost everything, and effectively ran the government in the lead-up to the 2008 elections. Of course, we all remember what happened just prior to the election - the housing market crash, and the virtual collapse of the economy as we knew it. There had been recessions and sluggishness in the economy throughout the majority of the Bush years, but with the bottom coming out from under us, people felt ready for a change.
In came Obama, and a Democratic majority in the Senate, as they rode a new spirit of hope for a different direction, for a new, and seemingly brighter, approach to the future.
Very quickly, the honeymoon period was over, and the President and Democrats had to sober up. The Tea Party had a "revolution" of their own, and once again, quicker than anyone could ever have expected, conservative Republicans were seemingly controlling the debate. Obama seemed much more passive and far less effective than most people had expected, and there were predictions (that seemed accurate) that this was a one-term President.
That, of course, did not happen. Yet, despite Obama's big win for a second term, the election, all things considered, was incredibly close. Here was a guy, Mitt Romney, who seemed to embody for many everything that was wrong with America. He was not just well-off, but filthy stinking rich. But it was not just that - e was condescending about it, once "joking" about how he could relate to those unemployed, since he also had been without a job for a period of time. As if those who are truly struggling without a salary, often times with other mouth to feed and lives to take care of, have $200 million in offshore accounts to fall back on. He talked about how the "47%" of Americans would never support him, and then essentially dismissed this. Not his problem. He was more concerned with "dressage", than with improving the real working and living conditions of Americans, and had the audacity to suggest (although perhaps not outright say) that these people were lazy, and at fault for their own problems. In the meantime, he favored greater tax cuts and incentives for the very wealthiest individuals and corporations among us. Of course, it goes without saying, he also made no distinction between people and corporations.
This was a man that, in hard time, Americans should have soundly rejected. Yet, the election was surprisingly close, and Obama struggled to retain his Presidency for a second term. Despite all of the mistakes and numerous gaffes throughout the election cycle, that included him going on an overseas tour and insulting the people in each country that he visited, and the whole Republican party seemingly not being able to keep their foot out of their collective mouth with regards to pregnancy by rape, it still took all that Obama had to pull the election off. Despite Romney leading a Republican field that apparently still had their head buried in the sand (looking for oil, or perhaps oil wars?) and insisting that methods that had proven a failure on more than one occasion in American history still could work to solve all of our problems, they almost convinced America to try it yet again. It almost worked. Obama won, but not by much. If that's not a statement about how dominant the Republicans have been these last few decades, even on those rare occasions when they lose, then I don't know what is.
Of course, there are reasons for this. One of them is becoming glaringly obvious to more and more people, although apparently not to the mainstream media, or the politicians. That is that the two parties are so similar to one another, they agree on so damn much, that there seems little to choose between them. They make much of what differences they do have, but this feels more like posturing than anything else.
The very best thing Obama can do for this second term (which is still very young yet) is to show that there are fundamental differences between the two parties. His Inaugural Address was a good start, but now he needs to follow that up. The polls that show a majority, in some cases a whopping majority, of Americans favoring him on these key issues should make a very strong and compelling case to take action, and reverse the direction that the Republicans have so long dictated in the American political landscape.
Obama needs to convince skeptics (of which I am one) that he really does stand for something deeper in America than his own personal ambitions, or for political profit. He needs to show, far more than he did in those first four years, what it was in him that so energized the majority of the American voters in 2008 to not only vote for him, but to have done so with such a measure of enthusiasm and hope. He needs to define himself, and the time to do it is now!
No comments:
Post a Comment