Peggy Noonan wrote a very insightful piece in The Wall St. Journal yesterday where she concluded that much of President Obama's current agenda is rooted in a belief that it would be better to have an impact as a one-term president than to spend eight years pandering to the middle and accomplishing nothing on his agenda. Though many presidents might publicly claim that they were of the same mind, Noonan believes that Obama actually believes it.
Though admirable, this could end up being detrimental to not only his own political aspirations, but those of his party. Much of the trouble the administration has faced over the past year has come from alienation of the ever-growing 'independent party.' A belief that it would be more impactful to push through items such as healthcare this year than get an extra four years in the White House would risk the votes of a wide swathe of American voters in 2012. It could also cost Democrats Senate and House seats this year, a fact underscored by a recent Republican Senate victory in the otherwise liberal bastion of Massachusetts.
Though Obama thinks things are tough now, a Congress without Democratic majorities could, in retrospect, make his historic first year in office look like a cakewalk. However, it seems that he may be willing to risk his political future, as well as that of his party, to tick as many objectives off of his agenda as possible. Principled, yes. Politically intelligent, no. However, it is possible that legacy is more important to Obama that longetivity. Of course much of both Noonan's article and this post is speculation. If there is, however, any truth to this analysis, America can expect a lot of attempts at change this year as President Obama attempts to put his stamp on both the nation and his presidency before the tide inevitably turns.
No comments:
Post a Comment