Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama's Second Term hinges on Syria Vote (118 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  As I said first (0+ / 0-)

    I actually don't think it matters much.  So my reasoning ain't gonna be good.

    My basic analysis is that if Obama loses the Syria vote, he will need to tack back to some 'safe' votes for awhile.

    In the world of safe Fed picks, Summers is establishment and Yellen the 'progressive.'

    If he picks Yellen, he loses all the republicans and maybe some Wall Street democrats.

    If he picks Summers, he loses some republicans and maybe some progressive democrats.

    I may well be wrong on this, as I really don't think the Syria vote will matter in the decision at all.

    I realize that Yellen has some very powerful support (and I have long suspected that Obama is gonna pick her anyway).  But basically, I am arguing that when a president gets hit, they run to the center, not to the left.

    "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

    by Empty Vessel on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 09:08:45 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Summers is the opposite of a safe vote (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      inclusiveheart, 4kedtongue

      Obama needs to shore up liberal base.

      In fact, he might horse trade no Summers for Yes on Syria.

    •  no fed chair nominee will be rejected, (0+ / 0-)

      none ever has, and, frankly, the differences between the two are not all that great.  all things being equal, he should nominate a woman, but both are conventional, somewhat active, monetary doves.  At the margin, i'd worry about Summers' ability to build working majorities on the FOMC, but i don't anticipate too much of a difference in rate setting and as a regulatory attorney friend of mine pointed out to me when I used the "Summers is too soft" argument on him, someone aggressively supporting higher capital ratios as Summers does, is not seen in the industry as that great of a friend.  (He has no opinion except to the extent that most people debating this issue cannot match his command of regulatory detail.  I find this trait annoying when he exhibits it, so i guess i owe everyone an apology.)   Difference in regulation will be marginal at best.  If you want to criticize Obama for not considering Sherrod Brown or Bernie Sanders for the post, that'd be more valid.  

      If Obama loses the Syria vote, he shakes his head and moves on to other things.  Boehner will take the positions on immigration and the budget shutdown that he perceives are in his interests to take, and Obama will round up support on the latter two issues to the extent the issues themselves compel that support.  People may be more inclined to vent about Obama doing this, that or the other.  Ultimately, the approval ratings will be more influenced by how people feel about Syria policy in 3 months, whatever it is, than a particular vote.  And given that other events and votes will supersede it in importance, the net effect won't be that great.  

      I think the diarist made the mistake of taking Politico (or politicoism) too seriously. People, including Obama, should continue to pursue what policies they think is right, and people can debate that, and hopefully accept that Democrats, at least, are acting in good faith based on what they believe to be the right course.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 11:09:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site