Conor Friedersdorf had an excellent piece in the Atlantic yesterday asking why liberals can't seem to blame Obama for his failed policies. You should read the whole article, but here's the gist of it:
Barack Obama did win in 2008 running on a platform more liberal than the one he has pursued in the interim. Perhaps he couldn't move any farther left on immigration or health care and stay viable. But on national security, executive power, and civil-liberties issues, he campaigned and won handily repudiating Bush-era policies, only to govern to the "right" of the Bush Administration.This likely has more to do with the fact that American society has become more tribal in terms of our politics. Indeed, we've gotten to a point where we feel "the wrong side absolutely must not win" and refuse to listen to what proves us wrong.
There wasn't a political imperative to do so. And I'm tired of that truth being obscured.
If liberals are going express horror at the GOP agenda as they enthusiastically support Obama's reelection, it's time for them to own his policies and stop trying to blame them on George W. Bush, or intransigent Republicans, or the financial crisis, or corporate campaign donations, or the desire to compromise, or an electorate that wasn't ready for the allegedly "knighted" Obama.
Well, I lean left and prefer Obama to Romney. And yet, I am willing to provide some things Obama got absolutely wrong:
1) The Drone War
2) Solyndra
3) Obama's failed tax-cut deal
4) His neglect of the Federal Reserve
5) The size and scope of the stimulus bill
Wow, I feel like a load has been taken off my shoulders! I feel like my conscience is clean enough now to complain about Bush some more. Yay!
No, but seriously, follow the facts as they are. No politician is perfect, so partisans should stop acting like their ideology is.
I agree with you, but the only problem is that (especially) in an election year, it's important for politics to get a little "tribal" — not so much that it obscures the facts, but enough that candidates can be elected. The Republican party is especially good at rallying around whoever the standard-bearer is despite disagreements with his policies, proposed or historical (see Romney). The Democratic party is not (see Nader). So, yes, we should follow the facts as they are, but since no politician is perfect, we need to recognize that we need to vote for the politician who is closest — or find ourselves stuck with a victor much further from our own ideologies.
ReplyDeleteOn a separate note, I love the blog! This is so cool :-)