About that phrase "Bully Pulpit"

People have been talking here comparing the Prez's circumstances to FDR's. Well FDR did have a very clear mandate from the people. Congress also had the same mandate. FDR didn't have coat tails when he was elected he had fricken magic carpet coat trains! The Democrats picked up 12 Senate seats and 94 House seats (the Republicans lost 100) compared to the last Congress Ol Herbie had.

Now it's true all of those Democrats weren't all that liberal, but that sort of sea change is hard to ignore. So yeah that's why FDR's 100 days were possible. The Congress was able to do what he wanted and he would be taking the heat. That's the kind of majority you need to get big things done. That's what a bully pulpit is used to get and we don't have one.

We had the beginnings of one with the popularity of the President, but once elected, for the life of me I can't figure out why the strategy didn't include an attempt to leverage that popularity. It was like ok we're gonna make history and when that history was made the job was done. During the campaign, I don't recall the sort of message that winning the Presidency isn't enough to be able to produce a change. You have to have a congress that will work together.

When Single payer was so popular and then the public option (whatever that was), why wasn't the message from the white house something along the lines of we can't get that through this congress, give me a better congress, one that will work together? What were his strategists telling him in 2009 when the baggers were out teabagging for jesus? If he would have called them the fools they are and asked his base to work to elect people who will at least cooperate we would be in a much improved position. That the administration wasn't beating that drum tells me his political strategists are more interested in focusing on his reelection than focusing on what is needed to make the changes we actually need.

When you beat that drum, as FDR did in '32 with the New Deal (even though it wasn't really defined), hell, even a Newt with an echo chamber was able to use that drum in '94, you can change congress to support your positions. The Koch brother know this, which is why they literally bought the drum for the mid terms.

It seems like the case was never made that it isn't enough to elect a President on a change slogan, that you have to also elect a congress that will at least cooperate in passing a reasonable facsimile of your agenda. At this point in my opinion, the answer to every question asked should include mentioning that if you want that you have to work to also elect a congress that will pass that. Laws promoting alternate energy? It needs congressional support, help get me a congress that will pass the laws and I'll sign them. Lather, rinse, repeat.

I hope the advisers to the administration recognize this early enough so we can build some coat tails this time around. It would be nice to have a bully pulpit and see it used effectively.