Washington – It’s ironic that President Obama could never be convincing as populist in chief. He had a modest upbringing — his family was on food stamps for a time — and he needed scholarships and loans to pay for his fancy education. He is no stranger to the struggles of everyday Americans.
By contrast, George W. Bush was born to Old Money and raised amid great wealth, privilege and power. Yet Bush was able to project an Everyman folksiness that made people forget his patrician heritage. Obama just doesn’t give off that guy-next-door vibe. Even if he were to roll up his sleeves, loosen his tie and start talkin’ like his predecessor, droppin’ his final g’s left and right, nobody would buy the act.
So I hope the White House pays no attention to the critics calling on Obama to cultivate a more populist image. Regaining the political initiative will be a matter of substance, not style — and also a matter of passion.
Bringing in David Plouffe, the architect of Obama’s brilliant election campaign, is a smart move that will surely help the president deliver his message more effectively. But part of that message has to be a clear sense of Obama’s bottom line. It’s not enough to use variations of the word “fight” more than 20 times in the course of relatively brief remarks, as he did Friday in Ohio. At some point, he needs to — metaphorically, of course — actually slug somebody.
I’m not talking about perceptions here. The point isn’t that Obama should be seen slapping opponents and obstructionists around as a way of demonstrating his presidential alpha-maleness. It’s that if Obama’s agenda is as vital and necessary as he says it is, the White House should make its actions match up with its words.
On health care, Obama told us for months how crucial a comprehensive reform package is to the nation’s well-being. If that was true when Democrats had 60 votes in the Senate, it’s still true now that they will have a mere 59. With Congress at an impasse, what is Obama’s next move? Acquiesce to starting over by holding “negotiations” with Republicans who have made clear their implacable opposition to reform? Or push forward with the Democratic congressional leadership, using every parliamentary maneuver in the book, even if it means suffering near-term political damage in the name of what is — according to the president — both necessary and right?
Similarly, the president can talk about jobs and the middle class all he wants, but the message won’t get through unless people believe his actions are commensurate with his words. He surely needs to do a better job of explaining the impact that last year’s massive stimulus bill has had in keeping people employed. It may be the case that he should push for more economic stimulus. It is definitely not the case that he should allow Republicans to stampede him and Congress into prematurely beginning to take action to rein in the deficit, because if the economy remains in the doldrums it’s the Democrats who will be punished in November.
Obama’s promise to change how Washington works was a major reason he got elected. He has tried to stick to this pledge religiously — heedless of the fact that hereabouts, no good deed goes unpunished. On the stimulus, for example, Obama included a huge package of tax cuts as a gesture to Republicans, who turned up their noses and still voted no. Obama’s bipartisan tango can’t work if one party won’t dance.
Despite this outreach, Obama’s approval ratings have sagged. I’m convinced that this is because results count more than process. It’s true that voters are fed up with business as usual in Washington, but not for aesthetic reasons.
It doesn’t matter whether Obama speaks in a loud voice. What’s important is that he speak in a clear voice, a definitive voice. When he draws a line in the sand — about health care, jobs, energy, whatever — he should do everything in his power to defend that line, even if it means bruised feelings and ruffled feathers.
In the end, voters will respect Obama’s accomplishments, not his aspirations. They will reward his passion, not his polish. It’s fine for the president to tell Americans that he’s fighting on their behalf, as long as he remembers that what they really want is not so much for him to fight but to win.
Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.
(c) 2010, Washington Post Writers Group
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.