I think he was walking a tightrope on that one. There were too many Republicans and blue dog Democrats to pass a stimulus bill the size of Paul Krugman wanted.
The Republicans weren't going to cooperate whatever he wanted, even after he watered down the stimulus with their tax break demands with a proven return of cents on the dollar. But Nancy Pelosi was doing a really good job of getting very progressive legislation passed in the House at the time. The problem is that he didn't even try for the larger stimulus; he listened to the people who said it wasn't necessary. That's been characteristic of his negotiations with Republicans since the beginning: he's had a tendency to start from the middle and negotiate from there.
Agreed. It was very frustrating to watch this as it developed. On the other hand, Obama negotiating from the middle forced the Republicans to move further and further to the right and into fringe territory. I also think frustration with his presidency has alienated and energized the left wing liberal side of the Democratic party. It will be interesting to see what the long term impacts of this shift will be.
I cannot imagine that the Republican Party, in its current incarnation, would ever elect the likes of Eisenhower, Nixon, or even Bush Sr. Hell, I think even Barry Goldwater would be a stretch these days.
On the other hand, Obama negotiating from the middle forced the Republicans to move further and further to the right and into fringe territory.
"Forced?" I think they gleefully took advantage of the opportunity to move farther to the right.
It will be interesting to see what the long term impacts of this shift will be.
I'm reminded of the so-called "Chinese Curse:" May you live in interesting times.
I cannot imagine that the Republican Party, in its current incarnation, would ever elect the likes of Eisenhower, Nixon, or even Bush Sr. Hell, I think even Barry Goldwater would be a stretch these days.
Not even Saint Ronald Reagan could get elected in the modern GOP climate. He'd be too much of a socialist.
I think he was walking a tightrope on that one. There were too many Republicans and blue dog Democrats to pass a stimulus bill the size of Paul Krugman wanted.
The Republicans weren't going to cooperate whatever he wanted, even after he watered down the stimulus with their tax break demands with a proven return of cents on the dollar. But Nancy Pelosi was doing a really good job of getting very progressive legislation passed in the House at the time. The problem is that he didn't even try for the larger stimulus; he listened to the people who said it wasn't necessary. That's been characteristic of his negotiations with Republicans since the beginning: he's had a tendency to start from the middle and negotiate from there.
Agreed. It was very frustrating to watch this as it developed. On the other hand, Obama negotiating from the middle forced the Republicans to move further and further to the right and into fringe territory. I also think frustration with his presidency has alienated and energized the left wing liberal side of the Democratic party. It will be interesting to see what the long term impacts of this shift will be.
I cannot imagine that the Republican Party, in its current incarnation, would ever elect the likes of Eisenhower, Nixon, or even Bush Sr. Hell, I think even Barry Goldwater would be a stretch these days.
"Forced?" I think they gleefully took advantage of the opportunity to move farther to the right.
I'm reminded of the so-called "Chinese Curse:" May you live in interesting times.
Not even Saint Ronald Reagan could get elected in the modern GOP climate. He'd be too much of a socialist.