"This is not a failure of presidential leadership. It's ... political power from another direction"

[phantom power]

I don't know if I can muster up more than one-and-a-half cheers for a "progressive" victory that was made possible partly by the votes of people who consider "welfare" to be any government aid to workers victimized by trade deals like the TPP. And I decline to join the general chorus—led, in my case, by Andrea Mitchell and my man Chuck Todd, who were selling this snake oil high even before the vote—of criticism that has as its central theme the notion that, if the president only had made nicey-nice to the Congress in his first term, things would have worked out differently today.

...

It has to be said that the president's visit to Capitol Hill was a notable clusterfk; Congressman Peter DeFazio came out of it visibly fuming.

"Basically the president tried to both guilt people and impugn their integrity, and I don't think it was a very effective tactic," said Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon. "There were a number of us who were insulted by the approach."

You can't really understand what happened—or appreciate what may happen next—without taking into account the transformative effect of the economic collapse of 2008 on our politics. There now is a legitimate progressive power base within the Democratic party that no longer takes the prerogatives of the corporate class as inviolable, and that must be considered seriously by any Democratic president and by any Democratic politician. (I wouldn't have threatened primaries were I Democracy For America, but I'd also be hard-pressed not to admit it might've worked.) This is not a failure of presidential leadership. It's the assertion of political power from another direction. If that unnerves the Green Room consensus, that's too bad. The president got a bad beat, not because he is a bad president, but because, on this issue, on this Friday afternoon, he found himself trying to sell something to a constituency that has changed. I think he has the good sense to realize this and to adjust his strategy accordingly. At the very least, he will realize that what happened to him and to his agenda today was a long time coming.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a35688/obama-trade-vote-loss/

[Rex]

1. Corporations like JPMorgan insist without free money, we would have fallen into

another Great Depression in 2008. Really, they were only talking about themselves.

[geek tragedy]

2. This is very similar to Bush's failure to get immigration reform through.

They tried to work with the other party in Congress, and got blocked by their own party whose objections they had ignored.

In Bush's case, that was when he officially became a lame duck. So it appears Obama is also one.

It's not a coincidence that Democrats in Congress were more afraid to cross Trumka than they were Obama.

[phantom power]

3. I think that depends on what he tries to do.

Ramming secret corporate-sponsored "trade" deals through Congress while telling everybody else to STFU? Apparently not going to fly. At least, I like to think this is a sign it won't fly anymore.

If Obama champions open legislation that is designed to help real people, I like to think he won't be a lame duck at all.

[geek tragedy]

4. That kind of legislation won't even reach the floor of the House or Senate.

He's irrelevant to the legislative process in terms of getting legislation passed.

He can still extract concessions via the veto power. But, he has no persuasive power left. Democrats don't care what he has to say.

He's in much the same position as Boehner was in 2013-2014.

[bvar22]

10. Trumka has indicated that he and his UNIONS...

...will target non-loyal Democrats over trade.
I'll be with him, though I do believe he has gotten so comfortable with "management", corporate jets, $2,000 suits, diamond pinky rings, and $1000 dinners that he has forgotten where he came from.

[lovemydog]

5. I am glad there's a growing progressive power base in the democratic party.

Out with the old guard, in with the new. I feel the party needs to go further left to attract voters. More important, I think it's the correct and essential direction for our country to genuinely improve. Since taking office, the President has helped stem off disasters. Now people really need to feel improvement in their paychecks.

[kentuck]

6. ".... he found himself trying to sell something to a constituency that has changed."

I think that is right.

The popularity of Bernie Sanders is an indicator, also, in my opinion.

Any Democrat that does not take this into account could be surprised when the primaries roll around.

[rhett o rick]

7. I sense a bit of panic in the Oligarchy. In 2007 they knew that they, via Bush/Cheney

pushed the American people pretty close to the edge. I think they decided to support Obama, knowing he was conservative and wouldn't mess with the NSA/CIA Security State, the economy, the military, the environment, etc. They would have rather had Bush but thought it smarter to give the people what they though they wanted. I think progressives bought the idea of a progressive Obama but now the progressives have had enough. The Oligarchs, in spite of the backlash, will have to support a Clinton v Bush race. The Populist Movement is starting to get a foothold and the Oligarchs are nervous. And they really have to be careful. If they openly Swiftboat Sen Sanders, the backlash might hurt HRC and someone like O'Malley or Chaffee could sneak in.

[kentuck]

8. Good points!

They are after Hillary already. She needs some progressives to protect her back. She will have to campaign more as a progressive liberal to keep the hounds at bay, in my opinion.

[rhett o rick]

9. I don't think she can. The more she tries to be like Sen Sanders the more attention she brings

that she isn't. She is in a hard place. She can't win any progressive away from Sen Sanders and she can't win any of the conservatives away from Bush. Sen Sanders can beat Bush but I don't think HRC can because the millions that are coming out to support Sen Sanders won't be happy to vote for HRC. They've plainly had enough.

[bvar22]

11. Hillary really tried to sound like a Bernie "Populist" last week.

It was pitiful.
Nobody believed her...not even herself.

[kentuck]

12. She's playing four-corner right now...

...stalling the ball until she finds out that the Congress has passed the "Trade Bill" in its entirety.

Then, she can say, that there were parts that she did not agree with but it is now the law.

[bvar22]

14. I'm sure she is already practicing the line:

"But we don't have 60 votes in the Senate."

[grahamhgreen]

13. Kickin' A!