My new column at CJR questions President Obama's claim that his re-election would "break the fever" among Republicans and induce a newfound spirit of cooperation. Here's how it begins:
With the media focused on the horse race (and Mitt Romney’s ongoing tactical miscues), the claims by President Obama and his allies that his re-election would “break the fever” or pop “the blister” of steadfast GOP opposition in Congress have received relatively little attention. But with the incumbent now a 3:1 favorite in betting and futures markets, his fanciful suggestions that being re-elected will convince Republicans to compromise with him deserve far greater scrutiny.
For more, read the whole thing.
I agree that the President is unlikely to get greater cooperation from the Reps during a 2nd term. In fact, as a lame duck, he'll probably get less cooperation from the Dems.
However, IMHO this issue is a way to duck the important questions. Suppose Obama had a cooperative Congress. What would he cooperatively do with Congress. E.g., how would he approach challenges such as: Nuclear Iran. Mediocre economy. Enormous deficit. Anticipated jump in the deficit when interest rates rise. Unsustainability of Medicare and Social Security. Developments in the Middle East. Climate change. High price of gasoline and food. Islamic terrorism.
By focusing on his relations with Congress, Mr. Obama avoids telling us how he would handle these and other issues.
Posted by: David in Cal | September 24, 2012 at 06:27 PM