In politics it is crucial that you are seen as working for what people want. There are times, of course, that you have to take a different position when it is the morally/ethically right thing to do, e.g. oppose CA's Proposition 8 even if your constituents favor it.
In this regard, it is critical that Dems, and in particular President Obama, do what they can to "reach across the aisle". Why? Because that IS what people want him to do. And in practice, Senate rules make that almost essential.
But what if Dems get the 60 vote majority in the Senate? Should they just jam their program down the Reps throats?
-- come over to the bright side --
President Obama understands what we need to do. The best way to lose the faith of the people is to be seen as non-inclusive, "elitist", uncaring for others, etc. Today's WAPO poll bears this out in vivid detail:
- What's more important to you - that political leaders (stick with their positions on important issues, even if it means a lack of cooperation between Democrats and Republicans); or that political leaders (try to cooperate across party lines, even if it means compromising on important issues)?
Stick with Try to cooperate No
their positions across party lines opinion
2/22/09 31 66 3
- Do you think Obama is or is not trying to compromise with the Republican leaders in Congress on important issues?
Is Is not No opinion
2/22/09 73 22 5
- Do you think the Republican leaders in Congress are or are not trying to compromise with Obama on important issues?
Are Are not No opinion
2/22/09 34 59 7
[NOTE: formatting is from the original]
So how are things going so far? President Obama is very clever. For his first question from the floor at yesterday's economic summit he called on Senator John McCain, praising him for work he's done, especially on procurement matters. Senator McCain, of course, tried to get a hostile jab in at President Obama by talking about the cost of "his" helicopters. Of course the helicopters were ordered by the most recent White House resident, an unelected individual who held the position of President for the preceeding eight years.
But President Obama was very gracious about it, agreeing that the cost was spiraling out of sight, showing that he was a step ahead of Senator McCain: "I've talked to Gates about this", and then joking that the one he has seems alright to him. And "but then I've never had a helicopter before" [unlike you Senator McCain].
President Obama consistently makes the point: "If you have ideas about something, let us know what they are and, if we think they are good ideas, we'll incorporate them." You can't ask for much more than that. And the polls show it.
Bi/post-partisanship means trying to compromise with the "other side". It doesn't mean it has to happen. It means you have to try.
Ask yourself this: "Have the Rep govs done themselves any good by saying they will turn down money for unemployment benefits?" Is their railing against the size of the stimulus going to do any good after they mortgaged the country for the war on Iraq? Is the average person, i.e. one of the 95% who will get a tax break, going to be upset because the filthy rich people have to start paying more to get us out of the mess they caused?
The next time you get upset with attempts at bi/post-partisanship remember, it doesn't have to succeed. You just have to be seen as trying to do it.
The great benefit of trying is that eventually, except for the diehards from the old confederate states, the "other side" will see it in their best interest to be seen as being helpful, not obstructionist, even if they are obstructionist. That is, they play on our home court.