What Obama is doing is not chess, but it is Obama 101

[grantcart]

The President's political strategy and tactics have a very clear form.


He identifies the arguments, then advances the goals. After that persistently and continually reframe the discussion in the context of the logic and the goals. Do not needlessly antagonize opposition but make them commit either for it or against it. If they are against it continue to use the logic and goals to reduce their political standing. Keep some big guns for the final minute, control the end play.


He doesn't get overly committed to a particular approach keeping the logic of the argument and the goal above everything else.

The goal (he has stated) is not a Public Option, the goal is to have real competition that would control costs. Nothing else is going to do that but the Public Option but by focusing on the goal and not the PO he makes a much smaller target for the opposition. He also doesn't want to take an overtly partisan posture because that too helps to reduce the target.


I don't think that they have a scenario that accounts for isolating the Republicans the way that they have, just the same pattern outlined above, so it isn't some fantastic chess operation where moves are planned 8 steps ahead.

By simply sticking to the logic, the broader goal, not getting into a petty tit for tat, and making the Republicans commit for or against, the President ends up painting the Republicans into a corner. It could have been 3 moves it might have been 12.

The Republicans are now officially quite out of it.

Now the only ones that matter are about 6 meandering Democratic Senators.

How will he deal with them?

1) Establish the logic
2) Keep stressing the goal
3) Refuse to get trivial

go back to 1) 2) and 3) as often as you have to.

In the end the Democratic Senators will vote for a Public Option because there is no other alternative that will meet the goal and no one is going to disagree that Health Care Reform requires that the current set of players get real competition (and cooperatives will not do it).

Its a lot more like playing "Horse" than chess.

[elocs]

1. When all is said and done we will know who is playing what and the results.

Until then why can't we save all the Obama is playing chess or whatever. Until we actually have something all the predictions are worth the electrons they are written with.

[grantcart]

18. I agree and would not have commented except that all of the threads

trying to explain his strategy were, IMHO, off either giving him strategic abilities that made him forecast moves way into the future or an incompetent blunderer who is gaining advantage by accident.

I think I describe a different and more plausible explanation.

[Phx_Dem]

2. Either way. He's played the Repugs right into a corner.

[CreekDog]

3. and the purpose of all the time and attention is to get those 6 to own the issue?

will there be a conversation between WH and the blue dogs that says, look Dems own this issue, if it fails, Dems will own it and it will take them down, and blue dogs are not going to walk away unscathed --it's too late for that. is anyone saying to the blue dogs that their vulnerable positions are even more vulnerable if this fails than if it succeeds?

[Cleita]

4. Is this just your assumption or a conclusion you have reached

from studying his moves in the past? Some how framing this as a game upsets me because that's what BushCo did. All their moves seemed out of a sport's playbook and no one really worried about the grass being trampled into the ground and the injuries and blood that it took to reach the goal.

[grantcart]

15. I have studied it in depth

The game analogy is simply a metaphor that people like to use.



Philosophically it is called epistomology. The basic and foundation question in philosophy is not actually what you believe but how do you know what you believe.

If you go back to Obama's most important speeches, the 'Race' speech in Philadelphia being the clearest example.

He went to great lengths to not only show what he thought about an issue but how he arrived at that point.


He is much more interested in developing the logic which will sustain the argument (and secure a political victory) than checking off something on a list.


The Public Option, by his logic, isn't important because it is the 'Public Option' but because it gives the reform the element of competition that it has to have to curb costs.

[truedelphi]

31. And when Obama decided to appoint Geithner and Bernanke

And let them toss away thirteen trillion bucks worth of our future, in order to establish a "Jobless" recovery that only helps the investor class, and even then, only those who pre-determine the collapse of stock bubbles, what play book was that out of?

Certainly not out of FDR's.

[grantcart]

41. so you are not with the Nobel Economist who thought that the stimulus was too small?

Even Krugman admits that it stablized faster than he thought.


When recovered the assets the government bought will be returned.


No FDR's (whom I love) was a balanced budget one, one that he only reluctantly put away when the collapse of the system was complete.


Now had FDR been innaugurated in January instead of March and went ahead with the balanced budget approach he advocated at the time and saw the situation collapse between January and March would you have a different opinion.

FDR also had astronomical advantages in both the House and Senate and could simply send legislation over to get passed without thinking about it, until he tried to 'pack' the court and the spell was broken.

If Obama continues to rack up victories at the same pace he started on he will come close to challenging in 8 years what Roosevelt achieved in his first 8.


Here are Roosevelt's words during the campaign


Economist Marriner Eccles observed that "given later developments, the campaign speeches often read like a giant misprint, in which Roosevelt and Hoover speak each other's lines."<34> Roosevelt denounced Hoover's failures to restore prosperity or even halt the downward slide, and he ridiculed Hoover's huge deficits. Roosevelt campaigned on the Democratic platform advocating "immediate and drastic reductions of all public expenditures," "abolishing useless commissions and offices, consolidating bureaus and eliminating extravagances reductions in bureaucracy," and for a "sound currency to be maintained at all hazards."


then after he won Hoover begged him to meet to announce some joint plans to calm the market. Roosevelt refused, actions that have since been viewed as having a disastorous impact on market confidence



After the election, Roosevelt refused Hoover's requests for a meeting to come up with a joint program to stop the downward spiral and calm investors, claiming it would tie his hands. The economy spiralled downward until the banking system began a complete nationwide shutdown as Hoover's term ended



I love FDR but what the economic platform he ran on and his actions from November 32 to March 33 were a fucking disaster.


Revisionist history is such great fun though.

[truedelphi]

45. I haven't read any Krugman in a while

But if he thinks that his jobless recovery has stabilized, it is only because he has a job and food on the table.

Definition of a recession - when your neighbor is out of work.

Definition of Depression - when you are out of work.

Well, the stock market BUBBLE will implode as it is only a matter of trying to decide whether it will be this fall, as Geithner's request for a raise in the debt ceiling suggests. (He wants the ten trillion dollar plus debt ceiling to be raised before October first, or once again, it will be said by the Powers That Be that all hell will break lose.)

Or maybe we have pumped enough money into the Big Banksters' pockets that the economy will continue down the merry path of the stock market investors having champagne dinners for about three years. But three years is tops.

Already most forecasters are pretty paranoid. You might try and listen to the Max Kaiser interviews that are up on DU every Saturday morning. KArl Denninger is not too optimistic. The people who write the "Money Market" forecast newsletters are pretty glum.

And then there is the view of looking at what your typical billionaire Wall Street hustle like Jim Rogers says. He doesn't even want to raise his kid in the USA as it will be so terrible here.

It is not a pretty picture.

[uponit7771]

48. +1

[paulk]

53. Krugman still thinks we need a 2nd stimulus

we have "stabilized" at the bottom of the L.

[goclark]

50. Thank you grantcart for your wisdom and your words

IMO,the President is not mean spirited and he sees a broad picture, he is smart.

One thing I always remember that he repeated over and over and over during the campaign --- " Make Me Do It!"

That is the signal to US that if there is something that we want him to do -- like the Public Option, than "Make Him Do It!"

That means for us to get to work, call our representatives, send $$'s , email our friends, vote in all those silly CNN polls and say YES to the Public Option, attend any and all FORUMS that are held in our area and support what we believe in.

If we would spend more time " Making Him Do It!" and less time :cry: and being :mad: the results would be positive for all Americans.

Let's Roll!:patriot:

[grantcart]

57. thank you for your kind words

[Onlooker]

5. I don't agree

Polls show public support for health care declining.

The town halls have allowed a handful of right wing activists to create the illusion that there is widespread opposition to health care.

The town halls have allowed the news to focus on sensational comments and rudeness rather than the purpose and value of the health care plan.

Obama's strategy has enabled a demoralized and fractured right wing to regroup and find common ground.

And he certainly has gotten trivial with his answers that have generally not been on broad themes, but focused on details of the healthcare bill.

He may get a bill passed, but he will have to change course (and from what I've read he and aides know that and are considering a different approach come September).

[grantcart]

13. Your premise on public support for health care declining

has been completely disproved by ProSense in this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8599032

[ProSense]

17. "Polls show public support for health care declining." Polls

lie

[truedelphi]

32. +1 n/t

[HughMoran]

39. Yes, there is a game called checkers

You might want to try thinking outside the box for a change. I know Obama does.

[DevonRex]

51. Ha ha haha ha HA!

You're really good at this.

:yourock:

[cleveramerican]

6. passions trump logic...

...too often in politics.
when the voters get all excited, Congressional leaders get cautious, afraid to make the wrong(for reelection) move.
Otherwise we'd already have national healthcare

[Cha]

7. Yes, Pres Obama and his Team have done this

through the primaries and the general election..and he always has a few fantastic surprises!

This article is from April 19(exactly 4 months ago on what he's accomplished up until then..

rasputin1952 (1000+ posts) Sun Apr-19-09 01:42 PM
Original message

Chicago Tribune: "Obama Has put his ambition and audacity to work"
Our president is tackling several problems at once:


President leading with a sense of urgency and calm

By Faye Fiore and Mark Z. Barabak

Tribune Newspapers

April 19, 2009


WASHINGTON — On the last Friday in March, President Barack Obama summoned leaders of the banking industry to the White House, where they gathered around a mahogany table in the sumptuous State Dining Room. On this day there was not a piece of fruit or can of soda in sight. At each place was a glass of water. No ice. No refills.

The president's message was as hard and crusty as a slab of day-old bread.

He urged the businessmen to view corporate excess through the eyes of Americans who are belt-tightening their way through the recession. Obama mentioned the carpet stains in the Oval Office — to make a frugal contrast with million-dollar executive suites appointed with $8,000 trash cans.

The bankers protested, citing the specialization of their field and the need to pay handsomely to avoid a brain drain. Obama cut them off: "Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn't buying that. My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks."

Direct, assertive and utterly self-assured, Obama has used his broad popularity, a driving ambition and sweeping agenda to move America in a wholly new direction.

Just shy of 100 days in office, he has ordered the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison and a troop withdrawal from Iraq, made it easier for women to sue for job discrimination, eased restrictions on federally funded stem-cell research, extended health care to millions of children, ousted the head of General Motors, reached out to the Muslim world, moved to ease tensions with Cuba, traveled to Canada, Europe, the Middle East and Latin America, and set aside huge tracts of wilderness for federal protection.

More broadly, Obama has seized on the worst economic crisis since the 1930s — exploiting it, critics say — and set out to reshape major aspects of everyday life: the price we pay to see a doctor, the size of our children's classrooms, the fuel we put in our cars.

More at:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-obama-100-days-part-one_earlapr19,0,2027270,print.story

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8355597

[nradisic]

8. It is chess...

A three dimensional chess game, while the GOP thinks it is a game of checkers...good luck morons!

[scubadude]

9. By your logic anything that passes will be an Obama win.

We'll see soon enough if Obama is playing shrewdly or simply angling as you suggest. I'm hoping he can get something done, but fear his "pragmatism" will weaken him to ineffectiveness. Making big promises then scaling them back doesn't look good.

He sure seems lonely to me. As if he really believed the Republicans would unite behind him for the good of the country. As if he believed that when he compromises, they will too. Unfortunately, the Republicans know that if you don't want the boat to move, you throw out the anchor.

The Blue Dogs are there too...

I support President Obama. Now we've just got to fight virtually all of the standing forces in Washington, (even within our own party) and big business too to get our work done.

Scuba

[grantcart]

12. No he only wins if his logic wins

He has established that the final bill must have real competition for the private sector. If it doesn't have it he will lose.


At this point people argue against the public option but no one is arguing that competition for the private sector is needed, he has, it seems, won that argument.

[galloglas]

21. "he has, it seems, won" Errrrr, no, no!

"He has established that the final bill must have real competition for the private sector. If it doesn't have it he will lose."


We are hearing "co-ops" being trumpeted, and they are not winners, nor competition.

Two varieties exist:

1) The type like dairies, etc., marketing together because they cannot exist alone and are owned by the members. Problem is, the members would be in business themselves if they could compete individually and only compete together because it is that or nothing.

Face it. Be it Mom and Pop groceries or a bunch or Sally, Jim and Joe Bob's Medical Service Contractors they cannot stand up to the likes of the national chains of corporate grocers (WalMart, perhaps) or Aetna, Blue Cross, etc.

but we'll probably get #2

2) The "mutual insurance concept" where the insureds own the companies.

Anyone who thinks that they, their parents, Gparents, or GGparents ever "owned a piece of the Rock" (Prudential) or any of the NY State giant mutual life companies (NY Life, et al.) should drop by and explain how that ever fostered any type of competition. It doesn't.

If we get a PO that is a #2, God help us. We'll be screwed for 150 more years and never figure it out. That is, until they privatize our "mutual health companies" and sell them to Hedge Funds.


If it is not a PO, and transparent enough for elementary school kids to understand, Obama could "win" and the whole country would lose big time. And, as with the beloved CDL's (invented by the mutual insurance giants), we would still be scratching our heads and asking "How did that happen??" But by that time, Obama will be long in a grave with his grandchildren.

It must be Public Option AND simple!!

[KoKo]

24. Well Said! n/t

[grantcart]

43. The co-operatives are a canard - nobody is taking that seriously

I think the unions have signalled an absolute veto on cooperatives.

Research shows that the success rate for health cooperatives is very very low, only two have succeeded:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/grantcart/203

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8586076&mesg_id=8586076

[Mermaid7]

37. Interesting Standpoint

I understand your logic, and it is an unique argument. The first of it's kind I've seen.

Well done.

Obama only has to diagnosis the problem, not necessarily prescribe the cure.

So if the problem truly exists, the others can't attack it directly or say it doesn't exist, unless they have some sort of proof, which they don't.

And of course then there is only one solution.

Brilliant!

I like brains like yours.

It goes through the process until it reaches the logical solution.

Um huh, yes!

[The Magistrate]

10. Unfortunately, Sir....

Means must be suited to goals. This crops up oftener in one direction, where people get bent out of shape over something harsh or ruthless being done to achieve a result that mitigates a larger harm, crying 'the end cannot justify the means', but the real point to be understood is that there are means whose character simply ensures a particular goal cannot be achieved by them. Someone recently expressed the problem here by saying President Obama is approaching this like a community organizer leading a meeting to help a neighborhood decide whether it preferred a vacant facility be used as a wellness clinic or a child care center, but in dealing with the Congress, he is dealing with a neighborhood in which some would be happy with either of those things, and the rest are holding out for meth labs and a gun store. In such a situation, one side simply must be steam-rollered; there is no other way. The opposition here comes from two sources: first, people who are determined to wreck President Obama's administration, and second, people who are bought body and soul by the special interests who will lose profits if genuine reform is enacted into law. Neither of these groups are reachable by reasoned persuasion.

"There must be blood."

[grantcart]

11. I believe that it is more like a basketball game

If you start fouling out early you are not going to be effective in the final quarter.

Taking blood now would be pointless.

Obama will keep wearing them down.

When it comes to the final minute he will take as many fouls and blood as he has to.

Just look at how much the arguments have been up and down during the last two weeks, in another week the over the top scare tactics of 'death panels' will have no effect and Obama will still be standing to bring out both barrels for the final closing period.

The only thing that counts is the final score.

[MarjorieG]

14. Are we really painting Nelson, Lincoln, et al, into a corner? Do sweeten it?

Media has been freezing coverage of Obama to make his case. I'm hoping when critical, he will do that.

[grantcart]

16. I believe that the House Democrats have just painted them into a corner

The House will not pass a bill without a Public Option. It will come down to 5-6 Democrats to either go along with their caucus or bring the whole thing down, something that will be very difficult to do if they want to maintain good relations with the rest of the team.

Remember they will need the rest of the Democratic caucus to pass on legislation that they want.


They are not stupid, the Senators who sign on at the end will be in a position to do some rather big horse trading.

[The Magistrate]

20. It Should Be Brought Down, Sir, If It Is Inadequate To The Need Of the People

The 'Blue Dog' shills for the insurance companies are working hard to see to it the result is simply a law directing more money flow into the coffers of their masters, and no such law should be passed.

[galloglas]

22. Indeed !!

" It Should Be Brought Down, Sir, If It Is Inadequate To The Need Of the People"

An honest magistrate ! :applause: :applause: :applause:

[The Magistrate]

19. Not A Good Analogy, Sir

Too many rules in that game for it to apply to a contest for high stakes of money in which there are no rules at all. It is necessary to recognize at the start what sort of fight one is in, and that does not seem to have been done here. The Republicans cannot be brought along, the only thing to do with them is to attack them mercilessly. Oddly enough, being for the most part authoritarian personalities, assaulting them vigorously is in fact the only course that gives any hope of moving some of them to vote as you wish: people like that will slobber at the boot that kicks them soundly, since it at least includes them in the hierarchy of power, with the person who kicks them. Obstructionist Democrats must be made to understand they will suffer, and their ability to bring pork to their tiny states and districts will suffer, and they should have been left in no doubt of this from the very beginning of the process.

[polichick]

28. So true! What's that quote? "Know thy enemy," I think. nt

[grantcart]

30. You misunderstand me, Sir.

You are concentrating no means and I am talking about timing.


There has already been a clear signal that ALL MEANS NECESSARY will be used.

Perhaps you missed this rather telling 'leak'.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/19/reid-spox-patience-is-not-unlimited/

WASHINGTON (CNN) – A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid insists to CNN that a decision to go it alone on health care has not been made, but Jim Manley also warned that Democrats are ready to use "any legislative means necessary" to pass health care.

"The White House still prefers a bipartisan bill, and neither the White House nor the Democratic leadership has made a decision to pursue reconciliation," he said Wednesday. "We will not make a decision to pursue reconciliation until we have exhausted efforts to produce a bipartisan bill. However, patience is not unlimited and we are determined to get something done this year by any legislative means necessary."

Your analysis of the motives of the Blue Dog democrats actually makes my point for me.

In the end the House will pass and the President will support comprehensive Health Care Reform.

Its passage will be willowed down to 6-8 Democrats who will have no impact on whether it passes or not but simply is passed as straight forward legislation or 'jammed' (sic) through as reconciliation.

Because they are corrupt at heart ensures that they will, in the end, go along. In the end they are more dependent on their caucus to supplying them a steady flow of contributors than any single lobbying group.

How can this be? It is the caucus that gives committee assignments and chairmanships. In the end they will go along to keep their chairmanships and their high profile committee assignments.

If you are by definition a prick and want to milk as much out of this legislation as possible then you want to be the last Senator to agree, holding out for the most in the horse trading.

For that reason, sir, I disagree that this is the appropriate time for the President to start drawing blood, it will simply cause them to dig their heels in further and up their price for their last minute conversion.

In the end I don't see any of these Blue Dogs having the courage or stupidity to hold out and be the one to try and stand up to their caucus, the President, the House and the overwhelming interests of the Democratic Party, although the one that is stupid enough to do so would by Bayh IMHO.

But if they are stupid enough to try they will not succeed, that is why the President (in the one move that I would say is analogous to a chess move) put it in the budget and can now make it pass by reconciliation.

The President would prefer not to take the most drastic of legislative maneuvers to get it passed but he set the foundation for it in case he needs it.

In any case our differences are not about methodology (in fact you were one of only a few that responded to the Chairmanship stripping thread earlier), simply about the timing of the President using 'lethal force' to secure final passage.

[The Magistrate]

34. My Tactical Inclination, Sir, Is To Hit Early And Hard

Experience has shown it to work. Blows delivered late must always be more energetic and damaging to achieve the same effect. It is best to make clear from the outset what the situation is....

Regarding the question of corruptibility, your read of the dynamic does not seem accurate to me. These people are creatures of their patrons, and beholden only to them. They feel secure in their office so long as they do their patrons' bidding. People who have a steady income so derived cannot be bought by an occasional offer, no matter how large; they will simply pocket it, add it to the steady stream, and do what they have been hired to do regardless. The only thing that will move them is a credible threat that they will placed in a position, i.e., being out of office, where they will no longer be of use to their patrons. They should be told that any funding they propose for their states will disappear from any bill, that allocations to their states i general ,measures will be trimmed, and that primary opponents will be found, and will be financed strenuously. The causcus should already be acting on removals from chairmanships, and even committee assignments.

[grantcart]

42. Let's revisit this after the dust settles and compare notes on strategy

(I would simply add that hitting early and hard doesn't work well with independents but let's leave that for now)


We are in 100% agreement that the most useful thing now would be for some fear of loss of committee chairmanships and assignments.

I have tried twice and gotten no traction.


Your standing here is such that if you were to draft an action OP it would most certainly get a better result than mine. I would be most grateful if you would make such an attempt.


I feel it is dry kindle that awaits the right spark, sir.




edited to add original link http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6334046

[The Magistrate]

44. Indeed, My Friend, The Event Will Settle The Question

It is a matter my fighting blood is up on, and as you observe, there is actually a considerable over-lap in our views of the situation.

[KoKo]

25. Hate to repeat myself, Sir,...but, again, Well Stated! n/t

[KoKo]

23. Well...we waited for Daschle..(keeping his powder dry) and Give "em Hell Harry"( needed 60 votes...

We've waited and waited ...and waited. Obama has not given the "Left of Left" anything so far.

So "Grantcart," I hear what you say and hope for "From Your Lips to God's Ears." But, I and other activist Dems are not waiting for "Godot" one more time.

He either "Fishes or Cut's Bait" as Ed Schultz said tonight on MSNBC.

I hear ya! I hope you are correct...but heard it all too many times to find it reassuring.

[The Magistrate]

26. Exactly, Ma'am: Now We Have The Votes By Party Identification, And It Is Time To Fire The Powder....

"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!"

[grantcart]

27. We are in agreement and I am in effect arguing that there is no

"master plan" chess strategy that has worked out a plan that guarantees a win.

He is doing what he does and what has been working for him.

For it to succeed requires as much pressure as we can bring.

[Gin Blossom]

55. Good discussion between you two.

This is what I like about DU. I'm more on the Magistrate's side of the argument, but I appreciate your summation here. What I find disturbing about the chess master and "Chill out...I've got it covered" memes is that they imply the best way to support the progressive side of Obama's agenda is to STFU and stop pressuring. Just trust and believe...

[Clio the Leo]

29. It's not so much that he's 8 steps ahead........

.... as he's 1 step ahead of DU. ;)

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our third quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[MasonJar]

35. Obama screwed up health care. He may be a great orator, but he is a novice

politician. He is doing a very poor job in several areas. We would have been better off if he had stayed a Senator and run in 2016.

[phleshdef]

36. What a load of horshit. A novice wouldn't have survived this last election, let alone won it.

[grantcart]

40. Except for one thing

He has passed every legislation he has sent to Congress


A huge budget (which will allow reconciliation for healthcare)

Stimulus Package

Woman Hispanic Justice

so far 100%


When he starts losing some battles then you can start with your criticism.


Now you are the novice.

[FrenchieCat]

49. +10

[paulk]

54. healthcare reconciliation as part of the budget process

is a really bad idea -

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=273x158781

[NoSheep]

52. I'm glad no one is listening to your advice.

[vaberella]

38. You're always on point Grantcart. n/t

[grantcart]

46. HA !

[cliffordu]

47. K$R,

I do believe you are on to something.

[Lorien]

56. He does a shitty job of staying on message if that's the case

"Logic"? Single payer is the only logical way to go both in terms of cost and coverage. Why should we continue to pay twice what single payer Nations pay for far less actual health care?

"Keep stressing the goal"? He was for Single payer years ago, then he was for a public option, now he's willing to take that off the table for a big government hand out to the insurance companies. So WTF is the "goal" that he's stressing?

[backscatter712]

58. Obama's taken discrediting the GOP to an all new level.

What's struck me is that by continuing at this moment to talk about working with Grassley and other Republicans, even after being spat on repeatedly by them, Obama's not only destroyed the GOP's credibility on health care, but he's also destroyed the credibility of the idea of even trying to work with them. The GOP thinks they're pwning Obama right now, but they're really digging their own grave. We're at the point where if you say "Let's work in a bipartisan collaboration with the Republicans!" you're greeted with derisive laughter.

When Obama decides to really drop the hammer on the Republicans and steamroll them, the Republicans will have been totally emasculated - the world will be looking at them like spoiled six-year-olds, and it will take years of rehabilitating their image before people will even start taking them seriously again.