a second-term obama can aim high, since he doesn't have to worry about re-election. i'm not saying he will, but it's certainly possible (e.g., bush's effort to radically change social-security at the beginning of his second-term).
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:28 (twelve years ago) link
well, alfred might be right. i'd have to research it some, but you can see why -- in theory -- a second-term president might feel more empowered to push for his or her agenda.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:29 (twelve years ago) link
Reagan and FDR's second terms are the only exceptions that come to mind.
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:29 (twelve years ago) link
There really is no good basis to generalize about the Presidency based on history. There just isn't much data out there.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:29 (twelve years ago) link
historically all the big shit happens in the first term, with some very rare exceptions
xp
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:30 (twelve years ago) link
well, alfred might be right. i'd have to research it some, but you can see why -- in theory -- a second-term president might feel more empowered to push for his or her agenda
It never happens, and it's usually the stick with which political parties beat voters ("Don't worry -- he'll take care of X in the second term").
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:30 (twelve years ago) link
i'll concede the point. but it makes no sense to me; why not swing for the fences in the second term?
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:31 (twelve years ago) link
it's more that their parties aren't going to support sweeping agendas in the second term since the President isn't going around to help them get re-elected
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:31 (twelve years ago) link
Because the president is a lame duck for the next four years?
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:31 (twelve years ago) link
going TO BE around
rmde
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:32 (twelve years ago) link
It's fairly well known that Obama hasn't done anything to help Congressional Democrats get re-elected. They're pretty pissed about it.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:33 (twelve years ago) link
okay, that makes sense, i guess. gutless, but rational, behavior.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:33 (twelve years ago) link
You're right -- we'll overlook 220+ years of American history
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:34 (twelve years ago) link
we need at least 300 years for an adequate sample-size!
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:34 (twelve years ago) link
we'll overlook 220+ years of American history
There are 220+ years of second Presidential terms (in the modern political environment)?
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:35 (twelve years ago) link
You seem to have found two rather notable exceptions to the "rule" (out of how many in the same period) without going back very far.
Of twentieth century presidents who've won a second full term on their own we've got:
McKinleyWilsonFDREisenhowerNixonReaganClinton Bush II
Of the successful ones, FDR's second term was certainly the worst: after the court-packing loss, the failed midterm party purge, and the economy tanking again, he didn't get on with the second New Deal until war was breathing down his neck. Then he set the New Deal aside altogether.
As for Reagan, I give him credit for negotiations with Gorby. The rest of his second term was Bitburg and Iran-Contra.
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:40 (twelve years ago) link
and I really shouldn't count McKinley because he lived for only three months of that term.
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:41 (twelve years ago) link
why bother running for a second term?
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:46 (twelve years ago) link
Presidents think that history judges second-term presidents more successfully, although Bush II will certainly give them pause.
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:48 (twelve years ago) link
You forgot:
― Aimless, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:48 (twelve years ago) link
SECOND TERM INITIATIVES (RECENT HISTORY)
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:55 (twelve years ago) link
social security reform
this didn't pass btw
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:56 (twelve years ago) link
Nixon's: destroy everyone. (Before he stumbled over the great revelation that then you destroy yourself.)
― clemenza, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:56 (twelve years ago) link
Nixon: getting himself in deeper shit
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:56 (twelve years ago) link
i know. the point isn't what passed, but what was promoted.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:56 (twelve years ago) link
reagan: war-on-drug
a marvelous achievement this is
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:57 (twelve years ago) link
I was thinking Nixon created the EPA in his second term, but it was his first.
― Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:57 (twelve years ago) link
reagan: war-on-drug__________________a marvelous achievement this is― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, December 27, 2011
__________________
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, December 27, 2011
alfred speaks like a man holding a whole sheet of lsd drops on wax-paper.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 19:58 (twelve years ago) link
clinton: state children's health insurance program; adoption and safe families act; foster care independence act
this is pretty pathetic next to the far-reaching implications of previous term's successes: telecomm act, welfare reform, changing FDA rules, NAFTA, reversing the Glass-Steagall act, Commodity Futures Modernization Act Family Medical Leave Act, DOMA...
this is reminding me how much I kind of hate Clinton
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 20:00 (twelve years ago) link
Bush II wasn't a "20th century president" btw
― macarena of time (step hen faps), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 20:01 (twelve years ago) link
this is pretty pathetic next to the far-reaching implications of previous term's successes: telecomm act, welfare reform, changing FDA rules, NAFTA, reversing the Glass-Steagall act, Commodity Futures Modernization Act Family Medical Leave Act, DOMA..
...raising the top rate by nearly 9 points, EITC expansion, community block grants...
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 20:03 (twelve years ago) link
there you go.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 20:04 (twelve years ago) link
Noam Scheiber @noamscheiber -- What I appreciate about Ben Nelson: He spent lots of time making Dem policies crappier to aid re-election to a seat he's giving up. Thanks!
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:08 (twelve years ago) link
sounds about right
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:10 (twelve years ago) link
That's certainly a fair characterization of what actually happened. But I might suggest that his intent was to make Dem policies sufficiently politically palatable for his and perhaps others' reelection, and that he/Obama ultimately failed in that regard. Not knowing him personally, I can't say.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:10 (twelve years ago) link
Public support of HCR has turned up now that it's beginning to kick in, but it's too little too late for many in Congress, which is why they feel abandoned by the WH.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:12 (twelve years ago) link
The WH should have fought back against the Tea Party attacks on health care better, but the DNC and others should have also. Nelson and others who changed it in an alleged effort to make it more politically palatable and then failed to stand up for it themselves did not help in the gaining public support realm
― Another Suburbanite, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:17 (twelve years ago) link
Public support of HCR has turned up now that it's beginning to kick in
lol how is this remotely true, this is counter to all the polling data I've seen reported as recently as last week
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:19 (twelve years ago) link
53% support repeal of HCR
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:21 (twelve years ago) link
Nelson and others who changed it in an alleged effort to make it more politically palatable and then failed to stand up for it themselves did not help in the gaining public support realm
yes but they helped themselves in the "cravenly begging for support" realm.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:21 (twelve years ago) link
a second-term obama can aim high, since he doesn't have to worry about re-election. i'm not saying he will, but it's certainly possible
Jesus God Almighty, you people are literally posting my old jokes.
Nixon term 2: "Peace with honor" in Vietnam; detente w/ USSR; save my phony-baloney job
― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:27 (twelve years ago) link
(xpost) If you track the numbers on that chart going back a year, when they often showed repeal up in the high-50 and into the 60% range, there does seem to be some improvement. I also assume there's some overstatement in general, being a Rasmussen poll.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:28 (twelve years ago) link
this is a dirty lie.
got this one from dennis perrin.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:29 (twelve years ago) link
The WH should have fought back against the Tea Party attacks on health care better, but the DNC and others should have also.
One and the same, really, but you're right on both scores.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:29 (twelve years ago) link
The problem with selling HCR to the public is that the one provision that everyone knows about and thinks they understand is the requirement to be covered, which most people perceive as negative. The only positive provision that most people know about and understand is the elimination of exclsusions for pre-existing conditions.
As far as I can tell, the other 98% of the bill is too technical for most people to understand or too marginal for them to care about - so that even when they hear about those parts they forget about them an hour later.
― Aimless, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:52 (twelve years ago) link
The problem with selling HCR to the public is quite possibly that the administration hasn't spent much time doing it, or doing it well. That's understandable from the perspective that they had other agenda items to work on, but less so, perhaps, from a political perspective.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:56 (twelve years ago) link
does dennis perrin know he's a meme on ilx?
― Mordy, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 01:24 (twelve years ago) link
I always forget that obama passed "universal health care" lol
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 01:34 (twelve years ago) link
I just looked at his site for--yes--the very first time, and what do you know, I've read his book on Michael O'Donoghue.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 01:35 (twelve years ago) link