Democrats 2012: where’s the agenda?
In spite of my best intentions, I can’t help thinking about the 2012 presidential election and the incumbent Barack Obama fairly often. In combination, the two seem to make up about 75% of news coverage, after all.
And mostly, what I think about these two subjects all points to the single question “should I vote for Obama?” Obviously, this question has nothing to do with a choice between Obama and a Republican opponent. The best argument I could come up with in favor of even the most allegedly “liberal” Republicans is that, maybe, if one of them was faced with a solidly-Democratic congress, we might actually get some more progressive reforms than Obama could get with a similar congress just because a Romney, e.g., might prefer signing a cap-and-dividend law, e.g., to getting absolutely nothing whatsoever done, and a Republican majority might decide that a given reform isn’t apocalyptian socialism after all if it’s a Republican president signing it into law rather than a Democrat.
And even that’s pretty unconvincing, for various reasons. One, it will be a big surprise if we get solid Democrat majorities in congress again in the next few years. Two, even if we do, the idea that Republicans would be more cooperative (or at least less obstructionist) toward negotiated reforms, if there’s a Republican president involved, is very much open to question in the era of hyper-radicalized GOP politics. Recall how John Boehner agreed in principle to a “grand bargain” with Obama on the budget, then had to withdraw his agreement in the face of backbencher outrage. Meanwhile, three, a president still has tremendous control over foreign policy, and a Republican president could do a loooot of damage (again) as commander-in-chief which I simply would not risk, even if I thought we might break up the legislative logjam a bit, in return. (more…)