Obama's New York Times Interview

[budkin]

Many progressives seem to be wringing their hands tonight after reading the text of this weekend's New York Times Magazine interview with Obama, mainly because he seems to be capitulating to the Republicans 3 weeks before the election, while at the same time trying to fire up the base. He even went as far as to cite a perception of himself as a "tax and spend liberal," playing right into the Republicans label of choice. What exactly was he thinking here? Is this some sort of strategy? For the life of me, I can't understand why he would say this stuff when he's having enough trouble motivating the "professional left." What do you guys think? Here's what Talking Points Memo had to say:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/nyt-mag-interview-here-comes-obama-20.php

[givemebackmycountry]

1. I don't know what the hell he's thinking - I really don't-

I'm looking for him to throw a punch and all he's doing is laying up against the ropes.
I mean I like the President and I am behind him 100% but I'm sorry - it's time to show some backbone.

[democracy1st]

12. he's not going to fight back,never has been his style.

[scheming daemons]

2. I think the interview was BRUTALLY honest..and reinforced for me that he's the right guy for the job

Truman-esque.

[impik]

4. Actually it proves that he's the wrong guy for the job

This country deserves Bush.

[Psyche]

22. I agree 100%

He has far more Mandela in him than some gangsta. And if he did get all up in everyone's grill, then the GOP owned media would run that 24/7 with Palin screaming that he's insane, going to rape your daughters, and is too unstable to be POTUS.

I'm glad he's the smartest ADULT around.

I WANT an even-keeled POTUS, who keeps his cool in the face of all the shîte he's been given.

Why can't the Left be frakkin happy EVER????

[impik]

3. He was the man that he is: Fucking honest. Something no one

in this country seem to be able to deal with.

[budkin]

5. You're right about that... look what happened to Jimmy Carter

No one wanted to hear that we needed to make sacrifices... sad.

[dennis4868]

7. We live in a country...

Full of selfish people....the repubs know this and take advantage of it.....this is why they always promise tax cuts and never ask anyone to sacrafice for a better situation....

[babylonsister]

13. Selfish, and don't forget ignorant. rethugs pride themselves

on knowing how to inspire the ignorant. They don't have to propose a thing, except maybe tax cuts for the rich despite all the evidence proving that would increase the deficit enormously, and their fan base falls in line. I still blame faux.

[impik]

10. Obama will go home with his head high

It's the country that will stay with the leaders it deserves.

[dennis4868]

6. Right.....

What's wrong with a president being honest....sometimes the truth hurts.....

[Me.]

8. Paul Ryan?

Seriously?

[vaberella]

9. Paul Ryan is a buffoon....BUT...and it must be said. He knows his numbers.

He does ask the numbers questions. Paul Ryan is utterly misguided but his numbers are rarely off. Even at times Paul Ryan disagrees with some of the approaches Republicans use. I think for when the Republicans pushed out their numbers thing on getting the numbers back down Paul Ryan had stated it wasn't ready or reviewed....and the Repubs went ahead with it. Additionally...he sacrifices his numbers at times for his core beliefs which as Obama says "doesn't add up." If you EVER see a debate between O and Ryan it's quite interesting. Obama never says Ryan is wrong in his approach. Which he isn't really at his base. However, he confuses his position as a Repub with his position as a numbers guy and this is where he ends up losing a debate with Obama.

Edited to clarify.

[Me.]

11. The Numbers May Be Right But I Question Both His Interpretation & Desired Application

Bye, bye SS. And this combined with the catfood commission leaves me in a less than trusting mood.

[vaberella]

20. I completely agree with you.

as I said his numbers are never rational when they meet his own ideological beliefs and said beliefs skew and influence is numbers in debate. Basically he over simplifies the situation in order to meet his ideological goal.

[babylonsister]

14. No he doesn't. He is a buffoon, period.

Krugman calls it/him 'the audacity of dopes'.

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=388&topic_id=24507&mesg_id=24507
Paul Krugman sinks his teeth into the GOP's Paul Ryan (R-FlimFlam).

[dennis4868]

15. you say his numbers are rarely off...

but I remember some economist reviewing Ryan's plans and they said it did not add up....plus, the Youn Guns book that he coauthored - the numbers certainly do not add up...tax cuts for the rich are not paid for.....

[vaberella]

19. I mentioned those numbers.

As I said he even claimed they weren't finished before the GOP heads ran with it without his authorization. I am not trying to defend him or anything. But I see where the President is coming from. If you've ever seen their debates it's pretty intellectual stuff on economics and funding both on state level and national level.

[paulk]

23. that was the most disturbing part of the interview

Every time I start thinking Obama can pull his Presidency out of the crapper, he says or does something so incredibly stupid that all I can do is scratch my head...

[ProSense]

16. Too much spin

While proud of his record, Obama has already begun thinking about what went wrong — and what he needs to do to change course for the next two years. He has spent what one aide called “a lot of time talking about Obama 2.0” with his new interim chief of staff, Pete Rouse, and his deputy chief of staff, Jim Messina. During our hour together, Obama told me he had no regrets about the broad direction of his presidency. But he did identify what he called “tactical lessons.” He let himself look too much like “the same old tax-and-spend liberal Democrat.” He realized too late that “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects” when it comes to public works. Perhaps he should not have proposed tax breaks as part of his stimulus and instead “let the Republicans insist on the tax cuts” so it could be seen as a bipartisan compromise.

<...>

The biggest miscalculation in the minds of most Obama advisers was the assumption that he could bridge a polarized capital and forge genuinely bipartisan coalitions. While Republican leaders resolved to stand against Obama, his early efforts to woo the opposition also struck many as halfhearted. “If anybody thought the Republicans were just going to roll over, we were just terribly mistaken,” former Senator Tom Daschle, a mentor and an outside adviser to Obama, told me. “I’m not sure anybody really thought that, but I think we kind of hoped the Republicans would go away. And obviously they didn’t do that.”

<...>

Still, Obama plays the partisan game as well. After months of quiet negotiations, some administration officials thought they were close to a package of new financial regulations with Republican support when, to their chagrin, the White House decided to use the issue to wage a high-profile and politically useful battle with Wall Street special interests. At that point, the chances for a deal across party lines collapsed, administration officials said, and Obama was left to rely almost entirely on Democratic votes.

<...>

Even if such an alliance emerges, though, the next two years will be mostly about cementing what Obama did in his first two years — and defending it against challenges in Congress and the courts. “Even if I had the exact same Congress, even if we don’t lose a seat in the Senate and we don’t lose a seat in the House, I think the rhythms of the next two years would inevitably be different from the rhythms of the first two years,” Obama told me. “There’s going to be a lot of work in this administration just doing things right and making sure that new laws are stood up in the ways they’re intended.”

When was this ever not the case: "Obama was left to rely almost entirely on Democratic votes"

Are they trying to portray him as wanting to be more liberal or wanting more bipartisanship or as too partisan?

The whole article reads like a spin to cast the President as the one who stood in the way of bipartisanship. Asked if there were any Republicans he trust, he mention only two, Gregg, who is retiring, and Ryan, who he has nothing in common with in terms of policy?

What the hell is the point?

It goes on to quote the President as saying: “Even if I had the exact same Congress, even if we don’t lose a seat in the Senate and we don’t lose a seat in the House, I think the rhythms of the next two years would inevitably be different from the rhythms of the first two years."

This article isn't pulled together cohesively and some of the points made are contradictory.

[Nancy Waterman]

17. He is absolutely right!

His biggest problem has been messaging and letting the GOP and FOX control the narrative.

[Psyche]

25. The GOP Owned media.....

The GOP Owned media..... has not only a lockdown on all information that is going out to the masses, but has also implemented a virtual Obama media blackout. The only place you can hear/see what Obama say anymore is either CSPAN or the web (whithouse.gov.)

I'm sick to death of liberal sites and Dems screaming that Obama isn't doing anything, when he's accomplished more in 2 years than any POTUS in history. Of course, these same whiners say Jimmy Carter was a failure, when he accomplished more in 4 years than any POTUS.

How did my country get so stupid and easily lied to?

[Beacool]

18. He's wrong about the credit card companies not jacking up interest.

Since this new law was about to be passed, every credit card I have has raised its interest. I just received a notice last week from JC Penney that my interest is going to be raised to over 26%. That to me is usury. To charge anyone 25%, or more, in interest is outrageous. Where the hell is the consumer protection that Congress promised when it passed this law?

BTW, I have excellent credit and I'm fortunate enough to have been working steadily for quite a few years.

x(

"It would be bad form for the president to anticipate an election result before it happens, but clearly Obama hopes that just as Clinton recovered from his party’s midterm shellacking in 1994 to win re-election two years later, so can he. There was something odd in hearing Obama invoke Clinton. Two years ago, Obama scorned the 42nd president, deriding the small-ball politics and triangulation maneuvers and comparing him unfavorably with Ronald Reagan. Running against Clinton’s wife, Obama was the anti-Clinton. Now he hopes, in a way, to be the second coming of Bill Clinton. Because, in the end, it’s better than being Jimmy Carter."

I find it amusing that he's reading Taylor Branch's "The Clinton Tapes", particularly after the many jabs he took at Bill Clinton and the 90s. One more lesson he may want to absorb: what goes around, comes around.

:D

[Blue_In_AK]

21. The interview is pretty disheartening to this Democrat

who is working like crazy to get Democrats elected here in Alaska. Thankfully, not too many people read the New York Times up here. It's almost like Obama is trying to lose.

[CBR]

24. I do not think he should focus on the so-called professional left

at all. Their minds are already made up and he should let them linger and complain on their blogs.

[Ramulux]

26. I want to cry

I can tell you now that if what he says in this article is true, we are all fucked. He seems to actually believe that his biggest problem was that he was too liberal, Jesus fucking Christ. He even gives praise to PAUL RYAN, one of the most dangerous scumbags in congress. He also seems to have pretty much given up on the mid-terms and resigned to the fact that we will lose the house which I am sure is a great idea for making your base enthusiastic.

I normally am not this hard on Obama, but this interview is frightening. If all this is true, Obama has not learned anything from the past 2 years and seems ready and willing to just fuck himself over politically for the next 2 years. I get the feeling that those of us who were disappointed with him up until now are going to be completely and totally demoralized in the coming year.