The election is over and in just a few weeks we will begin to do the business of the people with a Democratic controlled Senate and a Republican controlled House. The big question after the election has been, "Did Mr. Obama get it?" Did he understand that the majority of Americans have apparently rejected the policies by which he was attempting to govern the nation?
Dana Millbank, writing in
The Washington Post summarized the press conference held afterwards in this way, posted 11/3/10:
The president, facing the media in the East Room the day after what he called his “shellacking” at the polls, admitted it had been a “long night.” He confessed that it “feels bad.” He acknowledged “sadness” that so many friends and allies had lost their seats.
But what he would not acknowledge is that his policies had in any way contributed to the shellacking and sadness.
The Associated Press’s Ben Feller asked if he would concede that the midterms had been “a fundamental rejection of your agenda.”
Obama declined. “What they were expressing great frustration about is the fact that we haven’t made enough progress on the economy.”
NBC’s Savannah Guthrie noticed that “you don’t seem to be reflecting or second-guessing any of the policy decisions.”
“Over the last two years, we have made a series of very tough decisions, but decisions that were right,” Obama volleyed.
“You still resist the notion that voters rejected the policy choices you made?”
“Voters are not satisfied with the outcomes,” the president said.
No matter how many ways reporters phrased the question, the answer was the same. CNN’s ED Henry suggested there may be “a majority of Americans who think your polices are taking us in reverse,” and asked: “You just reject that idea altogether that your policies could be going in reverse?”
“Yes,” Obama said sharply.
This a clip from that press conference.
Scot McKnight began a thread on his
Jesus Creed blog continuing the discussion:
"What the critics of Obama are not understanding is that he does get it, and what it means for him is “Stay the course.” Obama doesn’t think the election results means he has to change; it means he has to do better at what he believes in and is already doing. No backing down here at all.
The one thing all should admire here is that Obama believes in what he is doing. It may well cost him the 2012 election, but he’s a true-blue liberal and he knows exactly what that means. It means he will stay the course. Which means I don’t think there’ll be much change in the next two years.
One of the comments on his post followed with:
"The problem with democracy is that conviction in the face of popular sentiment gets you fired. While I’m on the fence as far as some of his decisions, I can respect his unwillingness to pander to the polls".
Comment by Jeremy — November 4, 2010 @ 5:11 pm
"I would prefer that Obama did change course since I disagree with many of his policies. However, I would suggest that his attitude of not backing down is even simpler than suggested above. I think he is taking a gamble and hoping that the economy will turn around. I don’t think the American people (or any people for that matter)are as deeply principled as we might hope. As a politician you can do pretty much what you want as long as people have jobs, are earning good money and are well fed. I think Obama is hoping this will turn around than he will have more freedom for his agenda."
Comment by Andrew Potter
With these observations I want to add my own reflection.
President Obama is a far more pragmatic leader than we give him credit for. The left wing of the Democratic Party has mistaken his liberalism for their failed extremism. The Republicans have allowed too much political capital to be lost be not responding to those who impugn his citizenship and those who play to the often surreal diabtribes of the the conservative extreme.
I tend to agree with Andrew that the principles of too many Americans are about an inch deep, easily set aside when our prosperity and confort is threatened. The policies espoused by both sides are rarely principled positions, consistent even at the price of personal self-sacrifice. We want
everyone to have the good life as long as
we don't have to pay for someone else's good life. The social policies of the left are often pursued with a
the State knows best mentality that would have made the French Revolution proud - a revolution that destroyed many a life through the tyranny of those in power. The deregulative polices of the right are often pursued with a sense of self serving that actually believes the lie that everyone can pull themselves up by their own bootstraps and continues to doom more and more families to no health care or tort protection at all.
Unfortunately, I think Mr. Obama's policies still haven't addressed the two most critical issues facing our nation in the minds of most voters -- jobs and health care. I am waiting to see what he is willing to do to provide substantive answers to these grave concerns. And I am hoping Mr. Boehner will be concerned that his party will work with the best solutions that benefit all the people. I fear Ms. Pelosi has already revealed her lack of commitment to such a solution.
Posts
