Folks, all who know Obama say one thing about how he will govern:

He is a ruthless pragmatist. He is not an ideologue. He appreciates intelligence and excellence, and expects it from those he surrounds himself with.

With his cabinet, he will be deliberate and place the person he thinks most capable in each position. Yes, this just might mean a person like Summers. Issue #1 is the economy, and if the Obama administration gets this wrong, you can kiss goodbye any hope of a future progressive majority in the electorate.


I suspect there will be a number of people on this board who will soon be disappointed with Obama for basically not going hard left from the get-go (with some of his cabinet picks)....but those people missed who Obama is and what he is about. Obama is, I believe, more progressive (probably MUCH more) than Bill Clinton. However, he is deliberative, enjoys consensus-building, and has an amazing foresight and sense of politics. I believe the Obama administration will be a smarter, tougher, and more adept version of the first Clinton white house. He will be progressive-oriented, but also be centrist in the sense that he will listen and discuss the issues with the other side. He will not be an idealogue, and I get the sense, frankly, that a certain population on here and on the left simply wants him to be a liberal George W. Bush.

For this nation to continue to move to the left, it must be gently steered in that direction. We can talk all we want about the AA turn-out, the latino turn-out, and the youth turn-out, but a major reason Obama is president-elect today is because of white moderates and how he made inroads with that demographic. I trust in Obama's ability to communicate and speak to the middle of the country, and persuade them to get behind his future proposals (on issues ranging from healthcare to energy)...but building a true progressive majority will take time and above all a keen sense of politics (please note that when I say that, I don't mean looking at the polls before making each decision, but just generally being aware of what the country is ready and not ready for).

Like Obama said, this election is the CHANCE at change, not the change itself.

I completely agree with you.

I believe Obama wants to enact a progressive agenda but he will be very pragmatic in getting there.

People keep talking about qualifications and competence being the only import things. When someone say competence the immediate question should be competence at what? After all, Henry Paulson is certainly qualified to be Treasury Secretary. He is also competent if the "at what" part is answered by "at being committed to the right wing ideology that government should strictly keep its hands off the economy until it is absolutely unavoidable and then should steer all 'solutions' toward benefiting the already wealthy." This cry for ignoring the ideological bent of appointments is a cop out. The crisis needs solutions not just competence. If an appointee has previously shown a competence for adhering to deregulation, short changing labor and the environment and siding with Phil Gramm then that competence isn't going to do us much good.

For me it isn't about left or right it is about the "at what" question being answered with something that will actually help us going forward. For instance I have being pushing the idea of Sheila Bair for Treasury (http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=sheila_bair_for_treasury_secretary). Now Bair is a Republican so I think I can hardly be accused of asking for a far left leaning. I just want someone who understands the problem and its solutions and I don't think Mr. Summers is very competent in that area.

I turned the Rahm Emanuel pick over and over and wound up at that same conclusion.

He wanted a 'get it done' guy in the position, so he put one there.


K+R

:kick:

I have a lot of differences with the guy but his views are mostly irrelevant to the position he holds (unlike the position Summers might hold).

Thanks for the great post.
:hi: :thumbsup:

K+R.

n/t

I think he will be a great deal stronger on national security issues than anyone ever imagined -

K&R.

Thanks for the common sense wisdom. We have been ideologically whipsawed in this country. At this time of great economic and global peril, we need more good, old fashioned practicality.

This mess we are in took 25 years of Republican practices to clean it up, the change won't happen over night.

If Obama strays from that in any of his appointments, I will NOT be happy and I WILL express my displeasure with them.

And if anybody has a problem with that, that's too darn bad.

Some of his choices are starting to worry me. Summers will REALLY disappoint me. I've come to terms with Rham.

And rightly so.

And the left should call Obama out when/if he angers them, but the left should also understand that this nation has not turned progressive/liberal overnight and there are midterm elections in 2 years.

we gotz ta chill!

I'll probably not agree with him 100 percent of the time.

I'll settle for 60-80 percent.

It's an improvement over zero percent with the current officeholder.

Like the man said, the perfect is the enemy of the good.

What we got is good, better than anything since Reagan (my first presidential election), and I'm thrilled.

:woohoo:

I admit that since Tuesday I've softened some, and that includes trying to understand how people - including myself - are shaped in part by their times and experiences and trying to find some understanding and forgiveness for those who seem backward to me. And also trying to understand how humans as a species change slowly over time - it still makes me feel like I don't want to live on this planet and everything inside me screams that justice and equality must be here and now and immediate, but I am trying to find some peace with the idea. I don't mean that I'm becoming some paternalistic gradualist. I still think it's perfectly fine for me to personally push as hard as I can for extreme and immediate change. I just have to accept that although I am pushing the stone up the hill with all my might, I will die and someone will come take my place and that process may repeat it itself several more times before the stone gets to the top of the hill.

There's a lot that I disagree with Obama on rather strongly, but well - as an individual he may not be able to push the stone as hard as I can but he contributes the force of a nation and I think that he is helping to push it up the hill. As opposed to the last 8 years of the president trying to roll the stone back down to the bottom of the hill.

Congress.

And with that said, I have to 100% agree with your OP.

that putting an avowed deregulator, one of the people whose ideology and decisions eventually brought about today's crisis, is a way to fix the problems?

What does this guy bring to the table that's worth insulting half the country?

I just ain't seein' it.

I bet you thought that was subtle, didn't you?

I never thought he was going to aggressively pursue a hard-left agenda and I was okay with that b/c it was so vitally important we get into the WH period. And we're there. He'll do the best job he can do, weighing his options and using facts and evidence to dictate the outcomes, not emotion and whatever the hell else it was that Chimpy was doing.

Dealing with the Domestic Crimes, War Crimes, Treason and Election Frauds perpetrated by the bu$h administration. Unless these are dealt with, any progress will just an illusion.

Does anyone have anything Obama has said about this? Your personal opinion does not matter. I want to hear what Obama intends to do or not do. That is what matters.

corporate DINOs need Obama put in office before you realize this is merely magical thinking? I'm referring to your assumption that Obama intends to "gently steer" the nation to the left.

Granted, the evidence isn't sufficient yet, but the hints so far point to the opposite. Rahm Emanuel is someone I would have thought Hillary would pick. Obama's hardline stance on Iran, ignoring facts and the latest NIE, ditto. His caving in on FISA looks less and less like a random flub.

to the President - both people and information. He will basically control the kinds of issues and the kinds of thinking that other people are permitted to share with Obama. That's kinds of critical, wouldn't you say? It should be particularly important to those DUers who promised to "hold Obama's feet to the fire". Rahm Emanuel will be the firewall.

I have never doubted who's interests he will watch.

Mass movements for change work when they address issues where a LARGE MAJORITY of people already agree with them.

Protests by a vocal minority can RAISE CONSCIOUSNESS and prepare for effective change in the future - in 10-20 years - but not today.

Both are necessary, of course.

I expect President Obama to push for change on those progressive issues where a large majority are on our side. (Like health care, and Iraq. You know... small issues (insert sarcasm symbol here)).

He needs us for this. Democrats will face pressure from big campaign donors who have reasons to block any meaningful change. Obama's network of small donors can free him from this pressure. But only if we realize: he can act only when a large majority are with him.

imagine the country in its present state with someone else as President Elect.
He will do what must be done, despite all of our "constructive" criticism.

mark

comments to myself (pretty much) unless he does something COMPLETELY heinous and far right wing like escalate wars.

no Communism?! But Hannity promised me I could get gay married and EVERYTHING!! :cry:

white moderates, both Dem and Republican, who decided to give this new guy a chance.

We cannot disappoint them.

I think we have to stop thinking so much in terms of left and right. He's going to look for excellent and smart and what's best. We've trusted him through the smartest campaign I've ever watched - that makes me hopeful that he'll attack the big, big job ahead of him with the same steady, strategic and sensible energy.

Unfortunately, it will piss off a lot of people, which is fine. A lot of people need to be pissed off.

Redstone

i personally like being a pragmatist. but i can see where it will be an issue for those that are not. seems like i will like how obama governs.

not from the right, left or center.

Like he'll veer sharply to the left in growing the economy by creating incentives for global warming industry to grow. He already said he wanted to help the automakers 'retool' which I understand to mean that it's so they can modernize into building alternate energy cars, and he'll create jobs refurbishing the infrastructure. He'll throw the doors open to scientific and medical research (think stem cell research). And education will get a boost as well as businesses will be rewarded for staying here and punished for going overseas. He will make us a country of alternate energy usage and completely self sufficient.

Why? Because it's the pragmatic thing to do. In the long run it creates jobs, grows the economy and saves more money which is now being used to deal with things like health care in emergency rooms for those who don't have legitimate health care.

A pragmatist thinks long term. Twenty, thirty and more years down the line and works for goals that will come long after they're out of office. We've grown so accustomed to the abuse of the the instant gratification hogs at the trough of the last decade and more that we're still wrapping our brains around the concept of a government that doesn't pillage everything in sight. The Greed is Good people. Those days are over. It'll take a little getting used to to have people who actually govern for the good of the country and not just for the wallets of their friends.

That and vigilance on our part and whatever we need to do to make things work. We have our roles in this too.

:shrug:

I'm bemused by all the DU posturing devoid of reference to the books he's written. :shrug:

My only fear is that if Obama can't deliver on the change he promised, he won't win a second term.

Our economy is in dire, dire shape. Obama will be limited in how he can act, to some extent, because of the huge bailout and the ongoing cost of two wars.

Republicans may be weak now, but four years is a long time for them to regroup or for a third party candidate to emerge.

Obama can govern as a moderate pragmatist for the most part, but he will need to make some bold moves.

It's a cop-out to say that the country is not ready for big changes. Ready or not, we're about to be forced to accept big changes because of the enormous failure of conservative economic policies.

...fuck him.

the chance at change, indeed. all presidents can do whatever the fuck they want. gobama!

There are MANY highly qualified economists who are not sexist, racist, etc., and/or personal jerks. A pragmatist would pick someone who is just as good but who will not alienate people from other groups with whom the economist must work, and who will not slap the faces, figuratively, of millions of the pragmatist's supporters.

If his views had anything to do with his job and how he performs it, then you'd have a point.

I would expect the same from Obama.

what a refreshing CHANGE from what we've had!!

...but I understand that they will be made in the interest of bringing the country together.

this will take time and dedication.

With Rahm but I think Obama would get rid of those who don't keep up. No horse keepers in high office in his administration. I just hope he gets rid of Homeland Security.

A certain other ruthless pragmatist, FDR, once said that "we need bold persistent experimentation, just try something and if that doesn't work admit it frankly and try something else." It will be the same with Obama.

Obama is right on the edge between the Baby Boom generation and Generation X. FDR was similar, being on the edge of the Boomer-like "Muckraking" Generation and the Xer-like "Lost" Generation. Very interesting similarities, both are ruthlessly pragmatic visionaries, the best traits of the two generations they were/are one the edge of.

The only surprise so far is how quickly and bitterly the fights broke out at DU -- it feels like it was within minutes of his election. He's not even been sworn in, and won't be for weeks.

Me? I want things to get DONE, not prove a point by booting out 3/4 of the Democratic Party and all our Republican allies before we can even begin.

I trust President Obama--his ethics, his temperament, his judgment, his program. He can't possibly do it all by himself, and other people need to be persuaded to help get the program going. There is no magic wand, and the road ahead is long and arduous.

Roll up your sleeves and help out, folks, or get out of the way.

Hekate

I like practical people. They get shit done.

Thanks for the post and comment. OBAMA is intelligent
and practical and is going to govern from the brain. That's MY take.
We got problems. They need to be fixed. Some he can fix. Some WE must fix.
Some we must endure. He need to do his job and we need to do our job.

Some moderation may be proper, practical, but people want problems sensibly addressed.
We expect OBAMA will do that re War, Economy, Energy, Health Care,Education..
AND to get started DAMN bleepting QUICK (but also correct).
He can do it. I believe it. With lots of help, especially our help.

For now all we are asking for from repukes is a little "cooperation".
We better damn well get it. For the good of the country in a national crisis.
And those who are obstructing will need to be F* with a sharp pole.

Further, people are also justifiably EXTREMELY ANGRY,
They WANT SOME ACCOUNTABILITY for the abuses of rule of law.
That plus effective problem solving is what will promote healing and a return us to normalcy.

So watch the spin zone stuff or there will be a prompt backlash.
Reconciliation will occur in stages and the OP jumps too fast ahead.
It is not quite time to sing "Kumbaya". Fair notice.

We impatiently await Obama taking office.

There are some things Obama can do right away: do away with Bush executive orders, increase environmental protections, provide middle class tax relief, restore liberties taken away by the Patriot Act, and change course in Iraq. Other things, like improving health care and energy policy, might take a while. I expect that Obama will listen to other ideas on things, and don't hold it against him.

If he doesn't permit WW3, the North Pole doesn't melt; if I can watch documentaries on Al Jazeera without having the NSA sift through my email... IF, Quakers can organize without DHS up their ass with a magnifying glass...

I'll be happy

regarding everything else, including the economic situation... FDR... that's all I have to say. It was WW2 that brought us out of the Depression... FDR was elected again in 36, despite continued flatlined economy, because of the job creation and public works etc. He was loved.

The fact is, there simply IS NO MONEY... none. Nothin', zip, zilch, nada.

I have realistic expectations. But with a FREE PRESS, we can turn this into a permanent progressive majority. I'm optimistic in that way.

anything posted on this board very seriously. For instance, those of us who want to see a qualified person OTHER THAN Summers - a person as responsible as anyone for the destruction of the regulatory system set up to protect against the kind of ponzi schemes that caused this "meltdown" - can hardly be considered to be expressing a "hard left" view.

Is anyone calling for a advocate of communism to be Treasury Secretary? Using the term "hard left" for perfectly ordinary, middle-of-the-road advocates of regulated capitalism and protected labor/consumer/environmental rights promotes the right-wing myth that we are actually a "Conservative" country - a myth repudiated by a multitude of polls over the last years and most resoundingly by the election.

to ever satisfy our party's base. Its one of his strongest points. But he won't be really popular here when he tries to reach out.

Hell Joe Lieberman will probably get to keep his chairmanship just because Obama wants to lessen partisan fighting. That sickens me but its his choice. I understand his reasoning I just hate the outcome.

is just deluding themselves. I wanted Kucinich to be president because I AM a hard lefty, but we didn't get him, because this is not a hard left country. Obama is just left of center. I used to think he was center-right, until the "redistribute the wealth" bullshit started getting slung around and he very deliberately, unapologetically, and bravely repeated in interviews and speeches that he supports progressive tax structures.

Obama's job right now is to drag this country back from the edge of the many precipices that we've been pushed toward for the last 8 years. This is near Lincoln or FDR-level survival governance, and although I of course see our situation as opportunity to let capitalism die its inevitable death and rebuild our nation as a republic of many local production-based economies -- the American people aren't going to go for that.