The Politics of Principle
October 1, 2010 - by
Michael Barone of Fox News made an astute point about Obama at this week’s John Locke luncheon. He said Obama is a very different president from Bill Clinton: Clinton
Now, “ideologue” is a loaded word. You could also say “principled.”
You could apply the same description to the Republicans who expect to be in power after November 2. And they, being “ideologues” or “principled,” likely will repeat Obama’s political “mistakes” of the past two years.
I say mistakes in quotes because I think Obama knew what he was doing. From all available evidence, he didn’t push through the stimulus, health care reform and financial-regulatory reform because he thought they were popular. In fact, he had every reason to know they weren’t: e.g., the Massachusetts Senate election.
Obama seized on what he believed was, if not a mandate, then an opportunity to do what he thought was right and was elected to do.
Imagine that! A politician who did what he thought was right, even if it was unpopular. (Isn’t that what voters always say they want? Yes, but only if he does what they think is right.)
You can call Obama’s decisions courageous – or political suicide. But don’t expect the Republicans to learn that lesson if they win this year.
They will interpret the 2010 election as an endorsement of their principles, where it may just be a rejection of the incumbents’ policies – or a reaction to the bad economy. They’ll be just like the Democratic ideologues who interpreted 2008 as an endorsement of their policies rather than rejection of the incumbents.
The Politics of Principle
October 1, 2010/
Michael Barone of Fox News made an astute point about Obama at this week’s John Locke luncheon. He said Obama is a very different president from Bill Clinton: Clinton
Now, “ideologue” is a loaded word. You could also say “principled.”
You could apply the same description to the Republicans who expect to be in power after November 2. And they, being “ideologues” or “principled,” likely will repeat Obama’s political “mistakes” of the past two years.
I say mistakes in quotes because I think Obama knew what he was doing. From all available evidence, he didn’t push through the stimulus, health care reform and financial-regulatory reform because he thought they were popular. In fact, he had every reason to know they weren’t: e.g., the Massachusetts Senate election.
Obama seized on what he believed was, if not a mandate, then an opportunity to do what he thought was right and was elected to do.
Imagine that! A politician who did what he thought was right, even if it was unpopular. (Isn’t that what voters always say they want? Yes, but only if he does what they think is right.)
You can call Obama’s decisions courageous – or political suicide. But don’t expect the Republicans to learn that lesson if they win this year.
They will interpret the 2010 election as an endorsement of their principles, where it may just be a rejection of the incumbents’ policies – or a reaction to the bad economy. They’ll be just like the Democratic ideologues who interpreted 2008 as an endorsement of their policies rather than rejection of the incumbents.