"Axelrod: voter backlash against Obama was unavoidable"

[KansasVoter]

President Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, said Sunday that the economic disaster left behind by the Bush administration made the current voter anger – and its toll on Mr. Obama’s agenda – virtually unavoidable.

“I said to him a year ago, ‘Mr. President, your numbers are going to be considerably worse a year from now than they are today, because you can't govern in an economy like this without great disaffection,’ ” said Mr. Axelrod on ABC’s “This Week.”

“And that's what's happened,” he added.

Last week's US Senate race in Massachusetts, however, suggests that Americans are less interested in explanations or blame than a change of the nation’s course. Given the depth of the continued economic crisis, that puts the Obama administration in the difficult position of trying to encourage hope while also keeping expectations reasonable.

The election last week of Republican Scott Brown to the US Senate seat previously held by Edward Kennedy marked the biggest setback to the Obama administration since it came to office. The Democrats lost their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, endangering some of Obama’s most important initiatives, including healthcare reform and greenhouse-gas regulations.

<Snip>

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0124/Axelrod-voter-backlash-against-Obama-was-unavoidable

[hobbit709]

1. How about voter backlash from HCR?

Or didn't that enter your mind Axelrod?

[timeforpeace]

19. That's the spin we've been waiitng for, Ax. And losing Kennedy's seat was more than backlash. It was

a political disaster of unprecedented proportion.

[DJ13]

2. Obama could have mitigated the damage

But he was too busy cutting those transparent back room deals with insurers, big pharma, and the TBTF banks.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. when?

[DJ13]

10. When what?

When should he have begun working to bring the change most people wanted when they voted for him?

On day one.

Or even before that by not making Rahm his COS.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

13. he should have dumped the GOP from the start

[DJ13]

18. +1

:thumbsup:

[ProSense]

3. It's true. The right and some on the left are calling for a "reset."

There is no way to please everybody.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. What A Total Pant Load - FDR's Experience Proves This To Be Bull Crap

The New Deal Democrats dominated the 1934 Congressional elections and picked up larger majorities, and FDR, of course, went on to be re-elected in 1936.

FDR and the Democrats kept their promise of change, and they were rewarded.

[DJ13]

7. Team Obama had no intention of keeping his promises

And I dont believe they gave two shits about the party in the midterms until they realized what the voters were telling them by electing Brown last week.

Now they see that their calculations of a passive populace were wrong, and now its CYA time.

[ProSense]

9. Nearly the entire population was destitute in 1934

Things are bad, but not bad enough for the Republicans to oppose stimulus, jobs and unemployment bills. In fact, some Democrats stood are standing in the way of significant spending.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. Obama et al Never Even Tried - So We Can't Test Your Hypothesis

If Obama and Company had tried and failed, you might have a point - but they immediately went hard right, like Clinton. And the results in Congress will likely be the same.

[ProSense]

14. "If Obama and Company had tried and failed, you might have a point "

So you'd only be able to tell if it failed?

[MannyGoldstein]

15. Your Hypothesis (I Think) Is That Obama Wanted Change

But was obstructed. Since he never really tried, we don't know if he'd have been obstructed.

[Little Star]

33. If it succeeded the point would be moot.

[JamesA1102]

17. But they didn't have FAUX News, Rush and a corporate media

spewing out all sorts of lies and disinformation back then.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

21. Oh and how did 1938 turn out for him? That's right. Crushing defeat for pro New Deal Dems.

Which is why you conveniently stopped your analysis at 1936.

[MannyGoldstein]

22. That Only Helps Prove My Point... Reforms Slowed Markedly in 1937

He decided to balance the budget prematurely, starting with the 1938 budget. Things were still in bad shape.

Change stopped, Democrats got punished.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

23. Wrong. Dems that supported more reform were punished.

Roosevelt tried to punish anti-New Deal Dems by campaigning against them in the primary. He was largely unsuccessful there. Conservative Dems stayed in power and then came back to bite him in the ass.

[MannyGoldstein]

24. You're Stating That FDR Did Not Set Out To Balance The Budget in 1938?

And that reforms didn't slow down dramatically as a result?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

25. You are stating that Dems were punished for not acting liberally enough.

But the conservative Democrats weren't the Democrats that were punished. It was the liberal Dems that paid the price.

[MannyGoldstein]

32. Exactly: I'm Saying That Voters Expect Promises To Be Kept nt

[Cassandra]

5. My concern is that...

President Obama says he prefers to talk to his opposition rather than the people who agree with him. Perhaps the people who "agree with him" actually have ideas that he doesn't even know about because he doesn't think he needs to ask. It's a somewhat more egocentric position than I expected from him.

[treestar]

8. How did they think electing Brown was going to change course?

The pundits do think the voters are utterly stupid. The election of Brown would tell me only that the voters of Mass apparently are already turning back to the republicans. They figure war is the way to go after all.

[Guilded Lilly]

11. they didn't actually HAVE filibuster proof majority

with Lieberman around. There are plenty of Democrats around as well who were flies in the ointment.

And yes, a certain amount of backlash was unavoidable. And a certain amount of backlash was...earned. The nation won't get ANY change of course by filling Congress with more Do Nothing I Vote NO Republican obstructionists.

This loss in Mass. was not the be all and end all of anything. Brown certainly is not the Messiah of new-age Republicanism either, though I am sure the Republican Party would like to make it seem that way. It's all part of that panic-power-bullshit DRAMA that daily replaces GENUINE governing in Washington. But it was a great little CLUE as to what has to happen now.

Obama has the brains and the heart...they just both need to come out in serious warrior mode now.
You cannot fight belligerant punks with common sense intelligence. You have to be a warrior.

[jefferson_dem]

16. Of course, that's not true and Axe is spinning like a mutha...

You know what? I don't care. As long as Team Obama reads the politics and regroups to kick ass. Huzzah!

[timeforpeace]

20. "Losing Kennedy's seat was no biggie! Hell, we expected it!"

[dkf]

34. Wonder what they are expecting for November

:scared: :scared:

[bertman]

26. The "team" that I believed in so fervently a year ago is losing credibility by the minute.

Lies and more lies from the Hope for Change Gang.

[bvar22]

27. Oh Yes.

Bailing out Wall Street and NOT Main Street,

Protecting the very RICH, and telling the Working Class they will just have to compete with 3rd World Slave Labor for their jobs,

Killing EFCA

Lobbying for MORE "Free Trade"

Immediately forgetting about the "renegotiation of NAFTA"

supporting a Tax Increase on the Working Class,

and letting Joe Lieberman write the HCR Bill ....

ALL that had nothing to do with it.



"I did not campaign on a Public Option".

[katandmoon]

28. How utterly lame and pathetic.

[DailyGrind51]

29. We should kick Axelrod to the curb along with Rahm!

He is Andy Card to Emanuel's Rove!

[Beacool]

30. Spoken like the political hack that he is.

It's about JOBS, or the lack of them. I was speaking to some woman today at the supermarket deli line. We started talking and she mentioned that she had lost two jobs last year. She now has a job in Hartford, CT. Not exactly around the corner if you live in NJ across the river from Manhattan, but she said that she was lucky to even be able to get that job.

Add to the jobless situation the botching of healthcare reform and it makes for a bad combination, fueling the anger of voters.

:eyes:

[KoKo]

31. I cringe every time I see Axelrod out there "apologizing." What is wrong with that guy?

He always looks like someone has been "beating him" in a back room! The only people out there I see as Obama spokespersons are him and Valerie Jarret (a light weight) and Donna Brazille?

Come On...He's the President of USA elected with a MANDATE! Why does he send these kinds of people out to support him? A Downer, An Operative from Chicago and a Political HACK that no one listens to anymore! :shrug:

[Impedimentus]

35. "Axelrod: voter backlash against Obama was unavoidable" - not

No, it wasn't and isn't unavoidable.

The backlash is against ineffective, weak leadership that favors big banks, moneyed interests, and insurance companies at the expense of the vast majority of the people.

[BlueIdaho]

36. Fire Rahm, Axlerod, and Gibbs

Time to recalibrate White House.

[ProSense]

37. Reset.

This is what Mitch McConnell called for this morning.

Seriously, Axelrod is spot on.

Chances are that if Obama had gotten a $1.2 billion stimulus that some had been advocating, things wouldn't have looked much different from they are now. People would still be unhappy and calling for people's head.

Turning around a economy on near collaps wasn't going to be easy.

[Clio the Leo]

39. And hire who?

Dean, Hamsher and Shultz?

(warning: If you reply with "yes" will LAUGH at you like this --> hooohohohoahahahah)

[BlueIdaho]

40. Lets hire you.

I'll bet you could do a better job than Rahm.

[Clio the Leo]

41. No, then we'd really be screwed. NT

[depakid]

38. Since the administration going in had no intention of following though on the expectations

the campaign created- much less standing up and fighting for traditional Democratic values (or constistuenies) when push came to shove- he's right.

Disappointment and losses were inevitable- and will continue if they follow the same path.