How would you grade Obama's success at bringing bipartisanship to DC?

[Onlooker]

[boxman15]

1. The problem is that most in Washington don't want bipartisanship.

That's why it won't happen.

[William769]

2. This should be a lopsided poll.

[Tx4obama]

3. It takes two to tango. BLAME the Republicans.

The republicans have announced publicly that they will do EVERYTHING in their power to bring Obama down.

President Obama HAS tired his best for unity and to move our country forward, but you can't win when dealing with GOP assholes.

[ClassWarrior]

7. Or one could choose not to tango in the first place, instead of wasting one's time begging a...

...partner who made it clear from the outset that s/he refuses to dance.

NGU.

[William769]

9. ...

:yourock:

[Tx4obama]

13. Considering we do not control the House and we do NOT have a filibuster-proof Senate

Obama is forced to deal with the republicans.

Would you rather that 'nothing at all' were to get done between now and the time when we vote more democrats into Congress?

It is easy to criticize, but the hard part is answering the question: What do YOU think the 'solution' should be?

[ClassWarrior]

17. Govern using Democratic values?

That wasn't so hard to solve, was it?

NGU.

[Tx4obama]

18. Your comment has nothing to do with solving the problem of the GOP obstruction in Congress. n/t

[ClassWarrior]

20. And how does the current course of action solve it?

Hey, if I'm destined to go down, I want to go down fighting for what's right.

NGU.

[Tx4obama]

21. Negotiating and compromising is about all that can be done right now ...

until we regain the House and vote more Democrats to the Senate.

And at a state level, organize and vote the republicans out of state level offices :)

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

4. Not for a lack of trying

He thought he'd be dealing with rational, honorable people eager to move past Bush's "with us or against us" mentality. Basically, pre-Gingrich Republicans. Not Tea Party fanatics. :shrug:

I guess you CAN say, however, that he's brought the far left and the far right together in terms of opposing him. :shrug:

[Skittles]

5. I have to ask

why would ANYONE think repukes as "rational" following their chronic witch-hunting during the Clinton years? WHY???

[Proud Liberal Dem]

32. Obama gambled that the public (including Republicans) were thirsting for bipartisanship

following the incredibly divisive "with us or against us" Bush years and hoped to be a vanguard for more national unity (see his 2004 DNC Keynote Address), particularly given how rotten of a mess Bush left for the country (that we are still suffering through).

[boxman15]

6. Very true. nt

[Webster Green]

8. An impossible task.

He gets an F for even entertaining such a foolish notion.

[blkmusclmachine]

10. .

:spray:

[stranger81]

11. Have to give him an A for this one.

It's easy to be bipartisan if you abandon your own party's agenda & embrace your opponent's. If that's what you mean by bipartisan, he's done a splendid job.

[Speck Tater]

12. Since corporations are people now maybe this IS government of, by and for the "people". nt

[FrenchieCat]

14. Is there a poll for Republicans, or are they given a pass?

Are we so afraid of them that we simply ignore all what they do
and instead do what's easy; point the finger elsewhere to give us
something to piss and moan about?

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClassWarrior]

23. Who's ignoring the Rape-Publicans? Please prove your assertions.

NGU.

[mtnsnake]

34. Some people just like to run around falsely accusing certain people who criticize the President

that they are choosing to let Republicans off the hook because they would rather diss the President instead. Those who make those ridiculous assertions just can't face the reality that President Obama is not perfect, so they make false accusations against posters without a shred of truth to their claims.

[jenmito]

24. I started one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x740691 :hi:

[rug]

15. As effective as petting a rabid dog.

[TheCowsCameHome]

16. This is a gag, right?

:wtf:

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigwillq]

26. Success: F. Effort: A.

He really has tried, imo, to bring bipartisanship to DC. It just hasn't worked. Mostly not his fault.

[Logical]

28. But giving up sooner might of been smarter!

[bigwillq]

29. True.

I agree with that statement.

[Logical]

27. I bet I could name EACH poster who voted A,,,LOL

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donheld]

31. F

You cannot succeed if the other party refuses to participate.
You cannot succeed if you give up as easily as Obama does.
You cannot succeed if you ignore your own party.


It kind of reminds me of the Civil War story where the soldier wore blue pants and a gray shirt.
He got shot from both sides

[swilton]

33. No one is in charge and no one respects him as a leader

certainly not the GOP and definitely not his (former) base.

[swilton]

35. This question frames the argument

that Obama is a Democrat and supports its values and is failing to support traditional Democratic Party values through weakness, lack of leadership, etc. (some tragic character flaws)

The alternative frame is the one noted recently by Galbraith - though elected as a Democrat, Obama holds Republican values and is using bipartisanship as a fig-leaf to dismantle the long-held US social safety net and enact draconian trickle-down economic policies that favor elites and corporations.