Evan Bayh: Where Democrats went wrong

[Steve Petersen]

Interesting piece.

 

[MichaelHelp]

It's unfortunate that moderates like Bayh decided not to run for reelection

 

[kermit]

While I like Bayh I also think he's naive. Consider this:

If President Obama and Congressional Democrats were to take these and other moderate steps on tax reform, deficit reduction and energy security, they would confront Republicans with a quandary: cooperate to make America more prosperous and financially stable, running the risk that the president would likely receive the credit, or obstruct what voters perceive as sensible solutions.

He completely omits the 3rd option that Reps have been using for quite some time; reframe the message to make it seem that moderate, reasonable reforms is really extremist socialism. He completely underestimates the right-wing propaganda machine's ability to make up seem down and black seem white. There's a reason why most American's don't know that they got a tax cut under Obama (the largest in US history), it's because the right-wing messaging machine made it seem that a tax cut wasn't a tax cut.

 

[Ringo84]

It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our mandate.

Bull.

And we were too deferential to our most zealous supporters. During election season, Congress sought to placate those on the extreme left and motivate the base — but that meant that our final efforts before the election focused on trying to allow gays in the military, change our immigration system and repeal the George W. Bush-era tax cuts. These are legitimate issues but unlikely to resonate with moderate swing voters in a season of economic discontent.

No...the Democrats were too deferential to Republicans who were never interested in compromise, but simply sticking it to Obama.

The rest of it I agree with, more or less.
Ringo

 

[NotreDame]

I do think it is a true statement Democrats did in fact "over-interpret" their mandate. To some extent, Republicans and the Tea Party were successful in characterizing Obama's agenda as Socialist, but, Obama's agenda was, generally speaking, left of center, further left than the majority of Americans wanted.

It was Obama's too far left agenda which precipitated, facilitated, and energized the opposition movement, and his agenda was in so many ways such a vast transition to the left that it was rather conspicuous and did not need creative coloring by Republicans. Obama's financial regulation and health care legislation were undoubtedly significantly leftward leaning laws.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Conservative Blue Dog democrats lost half their seats, and the Progressive Caucus is now the largest Democrat group within Congress . It seems like being too far left wasn't exactly the problem.

 

[NotreDame]

Conservative Blue Dog democrats lost half their seats, and the Progressive Caucus is now the largest Democrat group within Congress . It seems like being too far left wasn't exactly the problem.

Perhaps...however, if the Progressive Caucus, which is not the largest Democrat group within Congress, were elected from districts historically leaning left, with the Blue Dog Democrats who lost coming from districts more conservative than them, then your point is lost.

 

[Douger]

I wouldn't say Dems "over interpreted" their mandate as much as they simply showed their true colors.
The two issues that most Obama supporters probably agreed on were winding down the "war on terror" and serious reform in the way the government works with big business from the health care industry to banking.
Since 2008, the war has escalated significantly and healthcare companies and banks are getting fabulously wealthy from Democratic "welfare for the rich" policies and continue to splash the kickbacks on politicians.

 

[BoltNut]

The article makes some good sense. It also, however, does leave out some "intangibles". Partisan Politics is one of those "intangibles". I'd agree that much of the consternation could have been avoided if a more "moderate" approach was used by the administration. But, no matter how moderate the method, our economy was the most pressing issue at the time Obama took office. The BP oil spill came early in his administration and became a real hot-button issue too. Much like 9/11 happened shortly after Bush took office and became the focal point for much of his administration. There was an "end" in site with the BP problem, but not so with the "War on Terrorism".

Not only did Obama try to do too much, too quickly, he virtually ignored the fact that he was almost doubling our debt in the process. Our economic problems were significant before Obama, but he had then assured a much longer and difficult recovery from it. Voters could see that we weren't going to spend our way out of the recession and they weren't willing to saddle future generations with a debt that was growing exponentially by the day.

 

[JoshuaW]

The Democrats didn't "go wrong" and they weren't surprised by the result of the election. Obama knew this would happen and said so over a year ago. This is the price you pay for signing major, history making legislation. Lyndon Johnson knew that by signing the Civil Rights Act, he would lose the South. He decided it was worth it. Obama decided that national health care was worth losing the midterm election. He probably anticipated losing the Senate as well as the House, so it isn't as bad as expected.

 

[KIYX]

Bull.



No...the Democrats were too deferential to Republicans who were never interested in compromise, but simply sticking it to Obama.

The rest of it I agree with, more or less.
Ringo

lol

Wait are we talking about the same Obama who days after taking office sat down with a group of republicans tried to shut them up by saying, "I won, get over it."???

Obama made it clear from the start he had no interest in what the republicans had to say so why kowtow to him?

 

[KIYX]

The Democrats didn't "go wrong" and they weren't surprised by the result of the election. Obama knew this would happen and said so over a year ago. This is the price you pay for signing major, history making legislation. Lyndon Johnson knew that by signing the Civil Rights Act, he would lose the South. He decided it was worth it. Obama decided that national health care was worth losing the midterm election. He probably anticipated losing the Senate as well as the House, so it isn't as bad as expected.

Wow then maybe he should have done something worth losing the house and the senate over instead of letting the health care industry write the bill.

 

[JoshuaW]

Wow then maybe he should have done something worth losing the house and the senate over instead of letting the health care industry write the bill.

Passing the health care bill was the hard part. It will be perfected over the next couple of generations. Social Security wasn't perfect at first.

 

[brindisi]

No...the Democrats were too deferential to Republicans who were never interested in compromise, but simply sticking it to Obama.Ringo

Well, perhaps Obama can now learn what deferential really means. He might even learn what NO means when the American people speaki.

 

[BoltNut]

The Democrats didn't "go wrong" and they weren't surprised by the result of the election. Obama knew this would happen and said so over a year ago. This is the price you pay for signing major, history making legislation. Lyndon Johnson knew that by signing the Civil Rights Act, he would lose the South. He decided it was worth it. Obama decided that national health care was worth losing the midterm election. He probably anticipated losing the Senate as well as the House, so it isn't as bad as expected.

I'm sure you'll be getting hammered pretty soon for this. LOL

All I'm going to say is that this is the price you pay for signing major, historically bad legislation. I'd agree it was a sort of "calculated risk" by passing health care, but he didn't stop there. The stimulus package was also a mess. He also wants to continue with cap and trade. He shows no sign of restraint or concern for the future ramifications of what he's doing. I just don't think he cares too much about what happened. I also don't believe that he will now "reach out" to work with the new congress. I don't think he "anticipated" anything. The only way he would see this as "not as bad as expected" is because he had no expectation as to how bad it could be.

 

[KIYX]

Passing the health care bill was the hard part. It will be perfected over the next couple of generations. Social Security wasn't perfect at first.

Wait SS is perfect now?

 

[Ringo84]

Wait are we talking about the same Obama who days after taking office sat down with a group of republicans tried to shut them up by saying, "I won, get over it."???

That sounds either like a Republican fairy tale or a story that was taken out of context. The Republicans have not been interested in cooperating with Obama since day one.

Well, perhaps Obama can now learn what deferential really means. He might even learn what NO means when the American people speaki.

I'm sure he is well aware of the meaning. Are Republicans aware?
Ringo

 

[brindisi]

I'm sure he is well aware of the meaning. Are Republicans aware?
Ringo

I'm more concerned that they be aware of the constitutional principles of limited government and personal responsibility. I Obama wants to work with them in dramatically reducing the size and scope of government, there will be civil respect for each other. No deference is due.

 

[Ringo84]

I don't necessarily want Republicans to be deferential. I would much rather see them demonstrate more willingness to reach across the aisle. I think such a gesture is long overdue from them.
Ringo

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I do think it is a true statement Democrats did in fact "over-interpret" their mandate. To some extent, Republicans and the Tea Party were successful in characterizing Obama's agenda as Socialist, but, Obama's agenda was, generally speaking, left of center, further left than the majority of Americans wanted.

It was Obama's too far left agenda which precipitated, facilitated, and energized the opposition movement, and his agenda was in so many ways such a vast transition to the left that it was rather conspicuous and did not need creative coloring by Republicans. Obama's financial regulation and health care legislation were undoubtedly significantly leftward leaning laws.

And now watch as Republicans, particularly ultra-conservative Tea Partiers, 'over-interpret' their mandate as representing unequivocal support of their agenda.