Obama To Hit The Road
Looks like the Obama team is planning to send the Salesman-in-Chief out on the road more to hawk his agenda:
Obama plans to travel more and campaign more in an effort to pressure lawmakers with public support, rather than worrying about whether he can win over Republican votes in Congress. Officials suggested that the new, more partisan tone Obama embraced last week in his speech before House Democrats at their retreat and continued at his news conference Monday was what he should have been doing all along.
My bet is that Team Obama thinks that appearing in specific hard-hit locales more often will better dramatize the fact that the spending in the stimulus package (and in other planned policies) is intended for real projects that would impact real people in real places.
Case in point: That interview Obama gave yesterday to Illinois’ State Journal-Register, in which he said that the CEO of a local plant had said that some planned layoffs “might not be necessary if we pass the stimulus bill.”
“I think every congressperson has to vote their conscience and do what’s best for their constituencies,” Obama said.
The pro-stimulus forces, I think, haven’t done as much as they might have to frame the choice this way — to make the point that the spending is intended to help real people who really need it, which would make it tougher for opponents to portray it as nothing but generic Congressional pork.
Let me just being with the clarification that I would ge the very last person to compare Ann Coulter to a giraffe with syphilis.
That said, I do believe it necessary at this point for Obama to continue or even expand his full-throated bully-pulpiting of the stimulus bill as a palliative for such as the following: http://www.newshounds.us/2009/02/07/fox_trots_out_ann_coulter_as_economic_expert_to_criticize_stimulus_compromise.php
ouch! I think there’s no question that there will be a stepped up effort. it appears that they were sobered up by the events of the first month.
Good news. More, please.
Funny thing about those layoffs at Caterpillar that “might not be necessary” — after Obama left the scene, the Caterpillar CEO not only contradicted Obama’s comment, but he suggested that even more layoffs might be necessary:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/12/another-metamorphosis-at-caterpillar-over-jobs/?scp=2&sq=Caterpillar&st=cse
If he’s going to make a very public example of a specific company, I wish he’d coordinate with their corporate honchos so that we can avoid these kinds of embarrassments.
True Obama fans have yet to be embarrassed by a thing! Greg doesn’t even seem to think it unbecoming to have your President known as the Salesman-in-Chief . . .
Well, sbj, wouldn’t that fall on the ears of any Chamber of Commerce with all the sweetness of a delicate chime of the Liberty Bell?
This is just what Obama needs to do and I would remind sbj of Bush’s sales tours to tout gutting Social Security, since sbj is apparently of the IOKIYAR School of nonThought.
I hope Obama continues to get out of DC regularly. That’s where presidents lose their minds – they stay baracaded in the White House -n
It’s very healthy to get out and listen to real people instead of Villagers on a very regular basis. Hope like everything Obama keeps it up. He is the best salesman he has.
Problem is– the GOP does not care about governance or constituencies. They care about power. And winning the news cycle.
.
Obama doesn’t need to “sell” anything. He just has to hold up a mirror to their silly, obstructionist ways. That’s the point of the traveling to swing states.
.
And I fully expect to see his poll numbers vs. their poll numbers continue to reflect this.
sbj–a quick point. President Obama has to go around the country demystifying the bill because the American people are not seeing actual economists debate the facts on the news (except for Jim Lehrer and Bill Moyers, of course.)
.
They’re subjected to incoherent, uninformative, silly acts of theater by “political analysts” and “politicians” ranting on CSPAN and Hardball about non-existent mice rather than serious, theoretical, and practical economic discourse.
.
Whatever your feelings about the President, try not to let it cloud your judgement about the gravity of the moment.
more partisan tone Obama embraced last week… was what he should have been doing all along.
I don’t agree. Showing the world that he was trying to be inclusive even though he may privately not have believed that it would do any good, had two effects. One, it took away the Republican talking point that he was just as partisan as they were. Two, by contrast it makes them look like a bunch of petty little grade school kids on the playground while Pres. Obama is obviously a grown-up.
Hey junebug: The Caterpillar screw-up just keeps getting better:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/schock-to-the-p.html
Turns out Obama appealed to the Cat employees to urge Rep. Shock to vote for the stimulus. Exactly zero employees approached him to do that. Read and see how Tapper adds a second hole to the first new one he already burned into Gibbs’ backside . . .
Is the CEO of Caterpillar (“might not be necessary if we pass the stimulus bill.”) trading his self-respect and economic common sense to the President for a promise that Rahm or some other Chi-town torpedo pound Pelosi/Reid until they go forward with the Us-Colombia trade deal. They were poised to sell alot of CATS down south until the Dem Congress got religion and a phony concern for South American persecuted labor. It was ‘Eff Caterpillar and other US manufacturers back then because Che lives!
sjb– I thought you would’ve realized that most readers here would not be interested in viewing something Jake Tapper wrote. I mean, the guy is a total ***. No one cares what he thinks or whom he tries to “burn.”
The Caterpillar screw-up just keeps getting better…
It might be unusual if none of the Caterpillar employees encouraged Rep. Shock to support the bill, as he claims is the case, but whether or not they did doesn’t speak to the ultimate effectiveness of the stimulus package. That remains to be seen. In any event, the $787 billion package remains far superior to what Republicans proposed — a package that was a small fraction of this bill, and based on nothing but tax cuts. They must realize, though, how weak that previous proposal is likely to be viewed, because they’ve completely revised their criticism of the bill. From the very same Jake Tapper article you cite:
“The congressman said that the bill is concerning because it is very light on infrastructure spending.”
Splain me what the **** tax cuts do for infrastructure spending, genius. I’m long past the point of expecting intellectual honesty from your side, but your guys might save themselves the indignity of looking ridiculous by maintaining a little consistency.
Apparently HTML tags don’t work here.