![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
4thofelevenSo, maybe I’m just cynical, but am I the only one thinking Obama’s starting to look increasingly like a one-term president? His health-care reform seems to be dead in the water – at best, he might scrape through the bare minimum of what’s needed. On foreign policy, Afghanistan’s as much of a mess as it was under Bush with the recent election turning out to be a farce, while no progress has been made with Iran or North Korea’s nuclear programs. The economy’s recovering, but as far as unemployment goes, the recovery is largely theoretical.
Now, granted, predicting elections three years in advance from another country is something of a fool’s game, but it does seem to me the Democratic party is going to suffer from depressed voter turnout in the 2010 congressional elections, while the crackpot wing of the Republican party will be out in force. Obama’s having enough trouble getting things done now; what on earth will he be able to accomplish if his party lose a few key seats in the Senate? And without real accomplishments to point to, in 2012 he won’t be able to run as the candidate of hope and change; rather he’ll be the candidate of broken promises and ineffectual leadership.
The problem I see is that Obama seems to actually believe in bipartisanship. The thing is bipartisanship in politics isn’t really a philosophy you're meant actually follow; it’s a big stick you hit the opposition with. “Why are you being so partisan?” you demand, to get them to go along with your own policies in the name of unity. Obama, as the candidate of change, was in a perfect position to constantly paint his opponents as out of touch obstructionist old fogeys – and he hasn’t. He seems oddly naïve about the realities of party politics; never give your opponents an inch of ground, because they'll only see you as weak.
Granted, US politics are very different from Australian politics. But it does seem to me that so far Obama’s squandered a lot of the opportunity he had for very little gain, and he’s going to have real trouble getting voters to muster the same sort of enthusiasm as they had last time.
Now, granted, predicting elections three years in advance from another country is something of a fool’s game, but it does seem to me the Democratic party is going to suffer from depressed voter turnout in the 2010 congressional elections, while the crackpot wing of the Republican party will be out in force. Obama’s having enough trouble getting things done now; what on earth will he be able to accomplish if his party lose a few key seats in the Senate? And without real accomplishments to point to, in 2012 he won’t be able to run as the candidate of hope and change; rather he’ll be the candidate of broken promises and ineffectual leadership.
The problem I see is that Obama seems to actually believe in bipartisanship. The thing is bipartisanship in politics isn’t really a philosophy you're meant actually follow; it’s a big stick you hit the opposition with. “Why are you being so partisan?” you demand, to get them to go along with your own policies in the name of unity. Obama, as the candidate of change, was in a perfect position to constantly paint his opponents as out of touch obstructionist old fogeys – and he hasn’t. He seems oddly naïve about the realities of party politics; never give your opponents an inch of ground, because they'll only see you as weak.
Granted, US politics are very different from Australian politics. But it does seem to me that so far Obama’s squandered a lot of the opportunity he had for very little gain, and he’s going to have real trouble getting voters to muster the same sort of enthusiasm as they had last time.
