Obama’s reelection means that his will be a consequential presidency

posted at 9:21 am on November 7, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

I’m still collecting my thoughts on what we saw happen last night, and probably will be for awhile yet — in the coming days, there will be tons of analysis and data-crunching and commentary that we’ll all be trying to decipher. But, in the meantime, there’s at least some small sense I can make of this, and funnily enough, it was Rachel Maddow who I first heard elucidate my approximate point on MSNBC shortly after we all figured out that we are indeed in for four more years of Barack Obama.

I would also just like to, point of privilege, to say, that this is an important moment for policy. This was a consequential presidency, not just because Barack Obama was the first African-American president, and not just because the country turned to the Democratic party after eight years of George Bush and Dick Cheney — this is a consequential president in terms of policy. In terms of civil-rights matters, … in terms of economic policy like the stimulus, in terms of historic, historic change like health reform, and like some of the other reform, Wall Street reform, credit card reform, student loan reform measures, that this president was able to pass. … Had this president been a one-term president, those policies would have been dialed back, along with the rest of his legacy. Those policies will now be held onto in this country as we experience what is almost an inevitable economic rebound that would’ve happened with anybody as president… as the economy gets better, those policies will be in place, and they will become part of the new normal in America.

It’s a pretty difficult job to hold back economic rebounds and growth in America, but somehow, President Obama managed it. He spent trillions of dollars we don’t have on boosting the economy, but unemployment is almost precisely what it was when he got started — talk about results. But, being prosperous and productive and innovative is what Americans do best, and no matter the obstacles, we’ve still got that hard-working, profit-seeking fire in our collective belly.

As American businesses and entrepreneurs start to internalize the fact that they are now inevitably going to have to cope with the coming onslaught of regulations, taxes, and rules that will become the new normal, the economy may improve — but Barack Obama’s agenda means that it will come at the opportunity cost of economic growth that could have been faster, more robust, and would have led to much more wealth and prosperity than what we’ll be getting. Even as we begin to divert ever-more of our economy’s time, resources, manpower, effort, energies, and money toward complying with and paying for more bureaucracy and top-down control, the economy may continue to limp along, but at the expense of a vastly shrunken pie.

So, as Maddow points out, Barack Obama’s will be a consequential presidency, and not just for the “historic” reasons that were lauded after his first election. His major policies are now here to stay, and even if 2016 is a better year for the GOP, it will be next to impossible to undo what we’ll now spend the next four years implementing. This also means that “inherited problems” excuse is not going to fly anymore — this time four years from now, Barack Obama will have a much more difficult time avoiding accountability for our economic stagnation (although I wouldn’t underestimate him — the Congressional-gridlock excuse is still on tap), and if the rate at which this supposed economic rebound is taking place continues to look so very historic in that it’s happening at less than a snail’s pace, maybe we’ll collectively start catching the drift of who’s fault it really is.

Maybe it has to get still worse before it can get better, friends.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

And rather than tamping down the scandal situation, they’ve only fanned with flames with another week’s worth of questions and denials to come.

Sweet. How sweet it is.

Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.

petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM

“We’re not crooks – we’re incompetent” is their battlecry. The water is circling the drain, Barry.

Philly on May 19, 2013 at 3:46 PM

This.

When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.

petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM

ear relevant…

driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.

kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM

This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.

savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM

Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.

However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)

What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.

In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.

It’s not socialism. It’s worse.

EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM

Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”

jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM

In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.

It’s not socialism. It’s worse.

EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM

A fitting capstone to Ed’s story about loss-prevention (aka employee theft) and management’s “permission structure” in this post.

(Not to mention the jaw-dropping statements of Eleanor Clift in this one.)

AesopFan on May 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM

I enjoy popcorn and hope it is a long week.

Drill and Fill on May 20, 2013 at 12:41 AM

Hey give Barky a break. He had to get his sorry ass out to Vegas.

tbear44 on May 20, 2013 at 4:49 AM

Of course they sent Pfeiffer out to do the Sunday shows. He was the most senior expendable staff member they had . . .

BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM

BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM

Pfeiffer… The guy with the red shirt in the landing party…

Boudica on May 20, 2013 at 5:53 AM

Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”

jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM

Perfect!

lea on May 20, 2013 at 7:11 AM

Does anybody else remember the campaign in 2008 when Obama defended his lack of administrative experience by saying he was just so smart and tuned in that his instincts were better than experience. Someone needs to dredge up these sound bites and play then with the current line about the government being too large to control and that the White House only knows what it reads in the newspaper.

bartbeast on May 20, 2013 at 8:43 AM

If where the president was during the Benghazi crisis is “irrelevant”, then he wasn’t where one would expect the Commander-in-Chief to be. So, where was he? Was he watching a movie in the residence? Was he bowling? Or was he having a bi-curious outing with his good buddy Reggie Love? If Obama was AWOL, as I suspect he was, it is he who is irrelevant. This entire stinkin’ criminal Obama Regime must go and now!

SpiderMike on May 20, 2013 at 9:31 AM

If this continues all week, it will be ‘O’ himself doing the rounds on the Sunday talk shows – except for Fox, of course. (‘O’ can do everything better than everyone else as he has been known to say.)

He then gets the extra benefit that no one will challenge him like they have begun to do with his minions.

Carnac on May 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Comment pages: 1 2