When Barack Obama was elected to the presidency, a sense of euphoria overcame (at least half) of the nation. Standing in the midst of a crowd of celebrating students outside the Columbia gates on the night of Nov. 4, I couldn’t help but wonder (and fear) if Obama had actually managed to spark a partisan realignment, banishing the Republicans to the history books alongside the Whigs of the 19th century. Less than a year into his presidency, however, my initial fears seem to have been poorly founded, as Obama shows the indications of political mortality.
Like every incoming president, Barack Obama decided to take advantage of his political capital and embark upon an ambitious legislative agenda early on in his term. This endeavor is usually marked by hubris on the part of the president and hurts his poll numbers. Yet, the fierce debates over the stimulus and health care reform seem to have bludgeoned Obama more than they bludgeoned any of his recent predecessors. A recent Gallup poll puts Obama’s approval rating at 53 percent, down from 62 percent in April. In fact, he has suffered “the steepest [decline in popularity] of any president at the same stage of his first term in more than 50 years,” a recent article in the Telegraph states. Given that Obama entered office with an approval rating of 78 percent, one has to wonder how such a popular political figure has seemingly fallen from the grace of the American public.
There are several reasons for Obama’s polling troubles, the most glaring of which is his detachment from the legislative process. For instance, in the spring, Obama championed the need for a massive stimulus program to help the American economy escape recession. However, he effectively outsourced the actual writing of the legislation to Congress, and was ultimately forced to sign and take ownership of a bill that is, at least from a political perspective, deeply flawed.
Obama’s greatest problem with the stimulus was that it included pork-barrel spending, despite his promises that the bill would avoid such outlays. Now, he should have known from the election that Americans have an irrational fixation on and hatred of pork. John McCain basically ran his campaign on a pledge to cut the deficit by reducing earmarks, even though such expenditures total only $18 billion. So, it should not have been much of a surprise that the Republicans jumped on this error, effectively painting the picture that the entire bill was composed of wasteful spending. As a result, Americans failed to see the stimulus as the new New Deal that it was intended to be, all because Rahm Emanuel couldn’t pick up the phone and tell Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to get their ducks in a row.
Say what you will about George W. Bush’s policies, the fact remains that the man knew how to run Congress and push through an agenda. By contrast, Barack Obama leads the greatest Democratic majority in a generation, yet has experienced incredible difficultly passing health care reform. As a result of his inability to control Congress, the lack of a single, White House-sanctioned plan has left Americans confused and distrustful of the entire reform project. Obama’s problems with Congress could be solved by a single word: coattails. Americans didn’t elect a Democratic supermajority because of the charisma and charm of Nancy Pelosi, but because they succumbed to Obamamania. Obama needs to remind Congressional Democrats that it is his party and his agenda, and his stunning inability to do that has cost him dearly in the polls.
The greatest example of Obama’s changing political fortune can be seen with the recent controversy over his receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize. When he was originally nominated for the prize back in January, a good part of the world basically thought he was the messiah incarnate (we all remember those silly commercials selling Barack Obama commemorative plates, statues, and bath towels, among other ludicrous items). Yet, when he was actually awarded the prize, the general response of Americans was that he hadn’t done anything to deserve it. If anything, the entire affair just highlighted his political vulnerability.
Now, in fairness, I do have to say that any talk of an impending Obama defeat in 2012 is premature. In order for Obama to lose an election there has to be a Republican to beat him, and at the moment there are no clearly viable candidates. Americans disliked Sarah Palin in 2008 and they will continue to dislike her in 2012, so any Palin-Obama matchup is certain to end in victory for the Democrats. However, the Republicans are being presented with an opportunity to exploit the cracks in Obama’s armor, and if they take advantage of it by nominating a smart, cogent candidate (cough, Mitt Romney) then Obama may be remembered as the Icarus of American politics.
Jon Hollander is a Columbia College senior majoring in economics. He is the director of intergroup affairs for the College Republicans. Reasonably Right runs alternate Wednesdays. opinion@columbiaspectator.com
COMMENTS