Obama tried too hard to work with Republicans
WASHINGTON — Amplified by the right-wing message machine, Republicans paint President Obama as an unyielding left-winger, an unreconstructed liberal who refuses to compromise. The president’s critics have turned the truth inside out: One of Obama’s greatest political weaknesses has been his stubborn — and unrequited — love for bipartisanship.
The president has made some of his biggest mistakes trying to woo a GOP opposition that has committed itself to frustrating him at every turn. If he had ignored recalcitrant Republicans, for example, his health care legislation might have become law without months of damaging political drama.
In an interview last week in his West Wing office, David Axelrod, one of Obama’s closest advisers, acknowledged that the administration had been surprised by the unified Republican resistance to the president’s agenda.
“Well, I think we miscalculated,” Axelrod said. “We had the idea that, particularly in a time of national crisis, there would be more of an inclination to work together.
“One of the bracing moments was when the president was on his way over . . to Capitol Hill to talk to the Republican House caucus about the Recovery Act. They issued a press release while he was on his way over to say that they were going to vote en masse against it. And that was a signal . . of things to come.”
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February 2009 without a single vote from a Republican in the House and the backing of just three in the Senate, even though nearly a third of it came in the form of tax cuts — usually a GOP tool for fixing anything. Most economists have credited the stimulus package with creating jobs and helping to end the recession, but Republicans continue to denounce it as boondoggle that blew a hole in the federal budget.
“I think the Republicans have been diabolically clever about how they’ve portrayed this,” Axelrod conceded. “They stood on the sidelines and made a decision that ‘we’re going to let him wrestle with this mess that we created. And then in two years we can try and hang him with it.’ “
After the stimulus, Obama and his Democratic allies tried to negotiate with GOP leaders on health insurance reform — a decision that gave critics time to mischaracterize the proposal and gin up opposition. Remember death panels? Government-funded abortions? Rationing?
Still, Obama kept going back with proposals meant to lure a few Republican votes for his agenda. That led to his disastrous announcement, just weeks before the Deepwater Horizon explosion, to expand off-shore drilling.
While Alexrod denied that the announcement amounted to a “quid pro quo,” Obama clearly believed that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and a couple of other GOP senators would, in exchange, support groundbreaking energy legislation that included a price on carbon emissions.
Obama didn’t get what he bargained for. The months-long environmental disaster dominated news coverage, obscured the president’s work on the economy and gave his critics more fodder to claim his administration is incompetent. And, since the accident forced the White House to tiptoe away from its eager embrace of off-shore drilling, it also provided Graham an excuse to back away from energy legislation.
A naïve expectation of bipartisan cooperation hasn’t been Obama’s only mistake. He waited until the last possible moment to try to inspire his base for the mid-term elections. Unlike Ronald Reagan, whose poll ratings were slightly lower than Obama’s just before the 1982 mid-term elections, Obama didn’t take every possible opportunity to pin the economic mess on his predecessor.
Nor did the president tamp down the huge expectations generated by his historic election. That has proved costly, as was clear during the president’s encounter with the “exhausted” Velma Hart, a supporter who questioned him during a recent town hall-style meeting.
“There’s no doubt that part of what we’ve encountered is the mismatch between very, very high expectations and the magnitude of the problems that we’ve been called upon to solve,” Alexrod said.
But the expected Republican gains in the coming mid-term elections may solve one of Obama’s problems: his misplaced faith in logic, persuasion and cooperation in the national interest. Tea-party-fueled anger has produced a wave of GOP candidates for whom the word “compromise” is akin to treason. There can be no miscalculation about their intentions.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
1,244 comments Add your comment
KMA
October 15th, 2010
9:42 am
@Reality
spending? Really? Yes, the GOP spent like drunken sailors…look where it got them. Bush’ largest deficit was 400+ billion and was in his last year (with a Dem controlled Congress I might add). Now, with a Dem president unwilling to stop the spending, and instead, egg it on, the deficits are 1.3 TRILLION. Almost 4 times as much as Bush’s deficit. The increase in spending is 21% and it does not included the ’stimulus’ money spent. Dems spend like drunken sailors on STERIODS.
Nothing Is Free
October 15th, 2010
9:42 am
And what you are seeing here is how easily it would be to run a Republican’s campaign. The nonsense that Ms. Tucker wrote this morning has been obliterated by the conservatives on here.
Enjoy your majority, libs. Granny keep making your funny little remarks.
You guys are toast.
williebkind
October 15th, 2010
9:42 am
Oh no you two are mulitplying? Somebody please make more baby republicans.
CT = Delusion
October 15th, 2010
9:42 am
I am truly worried about Tucker.
She usually just does some copy and paste hack job pulling quotes and nonsense polls that she uses to lambaste Fox News and Bush. Towing the (D) Party and AJC Company line is her meal ticket. Throwing in the racism rants earns her an extra cookie now and then.
No copy and paste today…all her own words. What exactly are you being offered for this one Tucker? What is the quid pro quo for todays load of dung?
Tech Man
October 15th, 2010
9:42 am
ctucker
October 15th, 2010
9:32 am
CT- your comments below are at best a mischaracterization of Obama and health care. I followed Obamacare closely and you are totally wrong.
——-
“invited Congressional leaders to the White House to talk about health care reform. They said they wanted medical insurance reform. He said, OK, I’ll consider that, but what do I get in return? You know what they said. Nothing. There was silence.”
Mr Right
October 15th, 2010
9:42 am
ctucker
October 15th, 2010
9:26 am
Bubba@8:12, You are not dumb enough to believe those are all separate instances, are you?
Peadawg
October 15th, 2010
9:28 am
ctucker @ 9:26
You’re not dumb enough to really believe what you wrote, are you?
ctucker
October 15th, 2010
9:29 am
Peadawg, You’ve gone too far with your no-so-clever crude language. If your vocabulary is no better than that, you’re banned.
It would appear like he was following your lead !
Obama tried too hard to work with Republicans | Cynthia Tucker « JHPPL News and Notes
October 15th, 2010
9:43 am
[...] More at Obama tried too hard to work with Republicans | Cynthia Tucker. [...]
Steve S.
October 15th, 2010
9:44 am
In all his 150 plus majoe speeches since election, Obama never once missed an opportunity to dismiss, degrade, derogate or deride Republiccans. His own words to the opposition shortly after taking office were, “We won, get over it!” Yes – he gave every chance to Republicans to agree with him and gain the shelter of his embrace but this is not what “working” with them is supposed to mean. Each example cited by Ms. Tucker of Obama’s willingness to compromise is actually just shallow window dressing which if accepted by Republican’s would have meant selling out their principles and providing Obama with cover fo his claim of post-partisanship. I challenge Ms. Tucker to examine the major public addresses of both President Bush and President Obabma in their first two years and tell us who in fact was the more polarizing.
Good Grief
October 15th, 2010
9:44 am
Granny, are you going to foist your liberal sensibilities on your grandchild or are you going to allow said grandchild to choose their own path concerning political ideology?
Steve
October 15th, 2010
9:45 am
You gotta be kidding me………….he’s had s on interest at heart…………he should have listened at what the American people has been saying…….HE’S A FAILURE………
BDGeorgia
October 15th, 2010
9:45 am
Cynthia, you’re just affirming the point….. “blame it on the other guy” is what incompetent leaders do and it’s what incompetent yet empowered journalists do as well. POTUS is reaping the poison ivy that he planted with arrogance during his campaign and the first two years of his presidency. While you and others from the left are reacting to the inevitable political consequences, sadly, we all lose in this situation. While the November elections will simply empower both parties to stagnate any real progress left or right, fortunately the anti-colonialist agenda of the President will be countered.
When is the AJC going to move you into an emeritus position?
An Auburn Classmate
Max
October 15th, 2010
9:45 am
Are you serious Cynthia? Have you been paying attention the last 2 years?
Red Hill Rebel
October 15th, 2010
9:45 am
How the AJC can pay someone to spew far left views ever time they write is beyond me.
Unless ?
Boogoer Presley
October 15th, 2010
9:46 am
Im sorry but this left side of the aisle poo flinging will not help you. You have less than 30 days to get it right. I suggest you get started.
Jimmy
October 15th, 2010
9:46 am
It cracks me up that there are partisans out there who buy into this line of thinking. Obama has had lopsided majorities in Congress for his entire term in office, including a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate for his entire first year (and quite frankly, any piece of sensible legislation would be able to pull Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins into the fold). The Republicans couldn’t block anything Obama wanted to do! The only thing bipartisan about Obama has been the opposition to his policies. He hasn’t been able to get his entire party on board because, quite frankly, even the Democrats know garbage legislation when they see it, and some of them weren’t willing to walk the plank (and take the country with it) by voting for it.
Besides, can you name ONE way that he changed ObamaCare at Republicans’ request? Me neither. So don’t give us this BS about how ObamaCare would have passed so much more quickly if Obama hadn’t tried so hard to work with Republicans. All he did was have a photo-op meeting with them to tell them why they needed to support his bill while Paul Ryan destroyed him with facts and arguments to which Obama had no response. The rest of the delay was caused by his inability to get enough people in his majority to commit political suicide by voting for that garbage
Malcolm X
October 15th, 2010
9:46 am
Most of these responses are typical of right-wing, Southern, hate-mongering, racists!! You country bumpkins spew your disdain for ANYONE who supports this president. I’ve read lots of sarcasm in your words, but no substance! The Republicans vote en masse against this president b/c they want him to fail, but it also has the effect of making the uneducated think that if THAT many Republicans voted against his policies, then he must REALLY be screwing things up! He has offered an olive branch almost every time new legislation is proposed……….if not for the obstructionist-enabling filibuster in the Senate, there would be hundreds of new policies enacted – to get us out of this mess! Now, even his supporters, who were spell-bound by their emotions during his campaign and ignored his warnings that solving this economic crisis would probably take more than one term (read: SEVERAL YEARS – NOT LESS THAN TWO). We all know why the REPUBLICAN Tea Party became so prominent during this administration………don’t know………well it’s got something to do with Obama’s bloodline………yep, I played the race card again…….commence to whining. If George Bush was such a horrible president (with evidence to prove it), where was the Tea Party (we-want-our-country-back) then?
There, I said it……….now let the crying begin……..
Paul
October 15th, 2010
9:46 am
Ms Tucker
“Obama invited Congressional leaders to the White House to talk about health care reform. They said they wanted medical insurance reform. He said, OK, I’ll consider that, but what do I get in return? You know what they said. Nothing. There was silence.”
By “medical insurance reform’ do you mean ‘tort reform’?
If so, I suppose we’re to infer that:
Tort reform was something Pres Obama was opposed to, as he didn’t include it in his proposals (not surprising, given that Howard Dean said the trial lawyers own the Democratic Party.
That Pres Obama was not willing to adopt an idea because it was a good idea on its merits, but was willing to adopt a good idea only if he got something in payback.
That Pres Obama was willing to adopt a bad idea, even if it had major negative repercussions, as long as he got a large enough payoff?
Greg
October 15th, 2010
9:47 am
One can only presume this column is a tongue-in-cheek semi-joke right? Designed to shock and inspire outrage. Unbelievable if it’s not. The leftist, racialist solidarity crowd refuses to confront that fact the emperor has no clothes.
This column just proves that anybody with the right background (not qualifications) can get into J school and get their own column. Probably couldn’t get into law school huh?
The Nerve
October 15th, 2010
9:47 am
I am still stunned by the sheer nonsense of this article. It should be on “Really!” with Seth and Amy on SNL. Really!!
JenP.
October 15th, 2010
9:47 am
“Most economists have credited the stimulus package with creating jobs and helping to end the recession,”
–You are out of your tree! Many of my customers are still out of work, with no end in sight, so guess where that leaves my business? You are very ignorant to reality.
Real people are being ruined out here, people who have spent decades working for a goal that has been gradually wiped out over the last two years as this recession grinds on.
“If he had ignored recalcitrant Republicans, for example, his health care legislation might have become law without months of damaging political drama.”
–It wasn’t the Republicans who needed to be bought off with back-room deals. Turns out that simply saying ‘no’ to a bad bill isn’t as disgusting to the American people as selling out your constituents for baubles.
A new stripe of Republicans- conservative ones- are going to sweep Congress in two weeks. And when they do, I hope they investigate every dirty nook and cranny in the White house and Legislature.
Roberto
October 15th, 2010
9:47 am
Robert @ 8:48
She’s talking to to dumbest people in America. Smart, hard-working Americans don’t get much riff from her.
satterfield
October 15th, 2010
9:47 am
your tripe is unbelievable. enjoy the election. this is jst a prelude until 2012
Emmmanuel Daniel
October 15th, 2010
9:48 am
It appears a majority of your readers, Cynthia, have not gotten over the election of President Obama to office. He will be re-elected for his good works – healthcare reform; keeping the promise of ending the Iraq war; confronting terror where it inhabits in Afghanistan instead of chasing oil boom in Iraq, turning the economy around, even in the face of reckless opposition from the GOP and their right-wing radicals. Radicals only think politics of untruths and divisiveness. They wil not get control of Congress.
Oops...another hater
October 15th, 2010
9:48 am
“Most of these responses are typical of right-wing, Southern, hate-mongering, racists!! You country bumpkins spew your disdain for ANYONE who supports this president”
The tolerant left bigots are today really showing their sweet-side.
Reality
October 15th, 2010
9:49 am
@KMA – I don’t disagree with you. My point is….. spending on what?
The Bush republicans over spent on the pentagon primarily to get their friends wealthy through military contracts. They wasted billions of tax dollars. But, listen to the complaints at the time (cricket, cricket, cricket).
The Obama democrat spending has been to help the American people survive this recession. I’m not going to argue the effectiveness of it or not – it’s not the point. The point is that at least they are spending in an effort to help the American people. At least the spending isn’t an attempt to line the pockets of their friends.
Do we need to get spending under control – of course. Should we cut money going to help the American people first? No way!
Voting for republican is a vote for more corruption, more spending of tax money to go to their ‘friends’, and less money to help the American people. Sorry, but who would vote for such a person? Evidently Georgia citizens.
I see that Deal is leading for governor. This is a person so corrupt that he was effectively kicked out of Congress. This is a person so corrupt that he has already been caught siphoning money away from his campaign into his own pocket. This is a person so corrupt that he refuses to reveal his tax returns.
Way to go, Georgia!
bobbcat
October 15th, 2010
9:49 am
BO compromised alright, from the time he said “We won, I’ll trump you on that.”
Doug in Johns Creek
October 15th, 2010
9:50 am
Ms. Tucker, why not cut-out the middleman and just let David Axelrod write your column? The AJC could certainly use the the savings your salary would represent.
Billybob
October 15th, 2010
9:51 am
Even Tucker’s watchdogs can’t defend her ‘wisdom’ today. A little embarrassing isn’t it guys and gals…..
Reality
October 15th, 2010
9:51 am
@JenP – Hummm. So, are you saying that Reagon and the 2 Bushes were not “conservative” republican? Just askin’.
Uncle Jimmy
October 15th, 2010
9:51 am
“The Obama democrat spending has been to help the American people survive this recession. I’m not going to argue the effectiveness of it or not – it’s not the point.”
Uh no. Im afraid lack of effectiveness is exactly the point which further confirms Obama is out of touch or doesnt know what he is doing.
Steven Marshall
October 15th, 2010
9:53 am
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA….HOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO…….HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE……….
Rapper T.I.
October 15th, 2010
9:53 am
What’s up y’all. This’s T.I., and I’m hear to tell you that whatever you’re going through can’t be that bad.
Give yourself a chance to work through it and God will show you the solution.
It takes a string man to stay and fight, but only a weak man ends his life too short.
Stay strong.
Peace.
JIm
October 15th, 2010
9:54 am
This lady is serious isn’t she? I thought she was kidding at first
Chad
October 15th, 2010
9:54 am
Enter your comments here
ramsey
October 15th, 2010
9:54 am
I burst out laughing when I read the headline. Thanks for your insight Ms. Tucker.
Nothing Is Free
October 15th, 2010
9:54 am
Granny, C Tucker
I know that you both love your kids. (Grand baby for you, granny)
So when the child starts in school, who will be better to decide what the child should eat, wear, the way they should think and act, you or the bureaucrats in Washington?
When you support a political party that wants to control everything in your life and your children’s life, you have to give up those rights for your own children. Will that be OK with you?
Don’t ever forget: bureaucrats are faceless. The person deciding the future of your child could be someone just like me, or it could actually be me. I could easily have more control and power over your child than you.
Is this what you want? Faceless, nameless people that you will never meet or be able to confront making decisions for your children. Is that what you want?
I know that you are going to deny this will ever happen. My kids went to elementary school in the early 90s and it was a constant fight to keep the bureaucrats out of our lives. I couldn’t imagine what it would be like now. AND NEVER FORGET: ACCORDING TO THE PRESIDENT THAT YOU BOTH WORSHIP, UNIONS ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE EDUCATION OF YOUR CHILDREN.
Don’t ever forget that the people that you support are the same people that stopped a great program in Washington DC that was helping gifted children is now toast because of Obama’s connections with the unions.
Try to think, Ladies. I might do you some good.
Nancy
October 15th, 2010
9:54 am
Seriously, CT?????? What happened to the sign Harry Truman had for the desk in the oval office? The one that read, “The buck stops here.” It still applies.
Whats Important
October 15th, 2010
9:55 am
Today is the official end of Cynthia Tucker being considered anything more than a shill for the liberal left. It should also end her career as an editorial writer for the AJC.
jt
October 15th, 2010
9:55 am
Obama just needs to “man-up”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Even if he does throw a baseball like a girl.
JohnBoy
October 15th, 2010
9:55 am
Yeah – why wouldn’t the Republicans support a $830B stimulus, fin-reg that will reduce lending and a healthcare bill based on phony numbers?
Obama out-sourced the bills to Congress. Obey wrote the stimulus, Baucus wrote the healthcare bill and Dodd/Frank wrote the Dodd-Frank bill. While Baucus did try to get Grassley on board, Obey and Dodd/Frank had little interest in conservative input.
Obama just showed up after all of the work was done, made a speech that Axe wrote and then blamed Republicans.
A REAL leader would have drafted his own bill with input from both sides and twisted arms to get it done. Think of LBJ with Civil Rights. Obama is too lazy and cautious to draft his own bills. Hard to get others on board when you have no plan.
chris orth
October 15th, 2010
9:56 am
“Obama didn’t take every possible opportunity to pin the economic mess on his predecessor”
What???? Do you have brain damage??? When has Mr. Obama failed to blame anything on his predecessor?
Zeke
October 15th, 2010
9:56 am
C.T., I thought you might have some small grain of relevancy, but, obviously I was wrong! The only way Obama, or for that fact, any democrat left wing socialist, would have bipartisanship, is if conservatives and republicans simply capitulated and approved of all their left wing socialist spread the wealth agenda! That simply reinforces the fact that you cannot compromise with liberals! Liberalism is a cancerous disease that must be stamped out to save the USA!!!
REDNECKITUDE
October 15th, 2010
9:56 am
Take a deep breath and let it out you Racist Bigot Welfare Republicans! The last time I checked Republicans were against people sitting round collecting welfare and doing nothing to earn their keep. The party of DO NOTHING will even support IM NOT A CROOK DEAL to be GOVERNOR. There is a lack of integrity in the Republican party that Americans don’t respect PERIOD.
Tech Man
October 15th, 2010
9:56 am
I cannot believe how Obama has bailed on his party right before the election.
During health care the mantra was
* vote for health care over your constituents in town hall meetings
* we will campaign for you
* be tough the President needs your support
Now their political lives are endangered and what is Obama doing? Caving in!
Leadership at it’s finest!
urright
October 15th, 2010
9:56 am
Enter your comments here
reddawg
October 15th, 2010
9:57 am
I am not sure what this piece is, but it sure as heck isn’t journalism, it is a biased article with the sole intent of being a homer for Obama. I can’t believe that this woman gets paid for this!
Jim Bob
October 15th, 2010
9:57 am
“Remember death panels? Government-funded abortions? Rationing?”
I love how these Republican issues are presented as red herrings when they are totally correct.
DEATH PANELS AND RATIONING: Fact — giving 30 million people basically free or highly subsidized insurance will cost money, money that will no longer go to the care of the people that were receiving it (see the $500 billion reduction in Medicare to fund the expansion of insurance to the uninsured). That will lead to rationing based on cost/benefit analyses by government bureaucrats (see David Berwick, who is now trying to figure out how to make Medicare get buy with $500 billion less in funding). Those bureaucrats who will decide when Grandma gets the costly operation that will extend her life or when she will just get the pain pill are the “death panels.”
GOV’T FUNDED ABORTIONS — Fact: the law now allows for the Dept of Health and Human Resources to determine what benefits insurance policies must have to qualify for the insurance exchanges. If Secretary Sebelius determines policies must cover abortions, then they must. And since the gov’t will subsidize purchase of policies under this law, you will have gov’t funded abortion. Obama’s executive order purporting to prohibit it is patently unconstitutional political stunt and will be knocked out by abortion proponents at their earliest convenience.
Besides, the law was passed 6 months ago and all of the horribleness it will create will occur years hence.
You really should stop propagandizing and deal in facts.
Wow....Reall?
October 15th, 2010
9:57 am
Cynthia,
I’m sure that you don’t read these comments, but i have to ask what did our president compromise on. If the past two years have been about trying to find common ground, then we all have a thing or two to learn about the middle. Spending is at an all time high, more unfunded social programs, more government regulations, less personal freedom, and an overall disdain for the people that you represent. I don’t think that those items are form the GOP play book. For what it is worth, he needed no GOP votes to advance his party agenda. Lets just have a little TRUTH in advertising.
bonnie dudley
October 15th, 2010
9:57 am
Is this an Onion report? What a complete joke.
Ellsworth
October 15th, 2010
9:57 am
ROTFLOL. You have to wonder if Ms.Tucker believes what she’s writing, or if she’s strictly fiction these days. Pretty convenient to forget about super majorities in both Houses of Congress. Our president didn’t need a single R to pass anything – he just needed all the Dems to get in line. That was one of the problems. There were a few Dems who remembered they had to go back home to get re-elected. Or they finally just let themselves be bought and then threw in the towel – Stupak ring a bell with anyone? Can’t blame this on the Rs. Mr. Obama – and Ms. Tucker – need to look at their own party. And yes . . . . Ms. Tucker is every bit the Democrat that Mr. Obama is.