Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Live Digest: 7/18 (335 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Such a president is currently serving. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, Stephen Wolf

    Obama has more or less used his leverage with Congress to maximum effect.

    You don't fight the fights you can win. You fight the fights that need fighting. -President Andrew Sheppard (D-Wisconsin)

    by Gpack3 on Thu Jul 18, 2013 at 01:33:02 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Really? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nimh, skibum59

      You think LBJ would've stood by and let Lieberman, Baucus, etc., give us the weak-ass ACA we eventually got?  Or a watered-down stimulus package?  

      Hell, he would've probably even worked out the whole fiscal cliff/debt ceiling thing in a way that ensured he wouldn't have to keep going rounds with Congress on it every year and a half or so.

      Seriously, read up on Johnson and "the treatment."  The man knew every member of Congress he needed for his agenda, inside and out.  Knew what made them tick, and exactly what he had to say to get them behind him, whether it was threatening their seat, or agreeing to throw his weight behind some project for their district.

      Those defections we had from Conserva-Dems on some of those issues I mentioned above?  They would've been less likely under a president like LBJ.  

      I for one was hoping, especially during the stimulus and ACA debates, that Obama would tell the Dem defectors that if they voted against those things, he would do everything in his power to make sure they got a credible primary challenger.

      •  lets not have a fight over this off-topic subject (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Stephen Wolf, Darth Jeff

        lets just disagree about it.

        ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

        by James Allen on Thu Jul 18, 2013 at 02:57:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  That's a hell of a lot harder to do though (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Gpack3, nimh

        when your party caucus is much more ideologically driven and less driven by pork and regional issues. It's much harder to pressure someone like Ben Nelson and his band of merry bluedogs today than it was when such characters could easily be replaced. Even in the 2009 environment, primarying someone in a swing district over the stimulus wouldn't be guaranteed to elect a more liberal representative and our house majority was built on the conservadem caucus.

        I don't think any of that is Obama's problem aside from the fact that he just doesn't seem to have been ready for Republicans to filibuster everything from day one. LBJ just had conditions that made it much more easy to manipulate a damaged system while Republicans had the means and the desire to break it once and for all.

        That and it just suggests that what went on in public with Obama being "feckless" was the same that went on behind close doors. We have no idea how ruthless and vigorously he and people like Reid push for the priorities nor did the public know it at the time of LBJ to any appreciable extent.

      •  It seems that you and I disagree (0+ / 0-)

        on how much leverage Obama actually had.

        You don't fight the fights you can win. You fight the fights that need fighting. -President Andrew Sheppard (D-Wisconsin)

        by Gpack3 on Thu Jul 18, 2013 at 03:09:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I apologize for how confrontational it sounded. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Stephen Wolf, lordpet8, nimh

          I just disagree with the idea that president Obama is some master strategist who is playing 11th dimensional chess.

          Granted, Stephen Wolf's point is a valid one, about the environment being different.

          But Obama also has another disadvantage that wouldn't allow him to do what Johnson did.  Simply put, if we combine his House and Senate tenures, Johnson was in Congress for 24 years.  He knew a lot of these people, and knew what made them tick.  And if he didn't know them personally, he knew how different TYPES of legislators and politicians tended to think.

          President Obama was a senator for 2 years before becoming president.  That's nowhere near long enough to learn those kinds of things.  

          So I guess to be more fair to him, I should just say he's more out of his element than Johnson.

    •  honestly it's hard to compare (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nimh

      Both you(Gpack3) and  The Dude 415 make some fair points.

      The senate wasn't as far polarized back in the 1960's as it is now. You had plenty of liberal R's and conservative D's break ranks to make congress appear much more bipartisan.

      LBJ was just one of best of deal makers when it came to passing laws out of congress. The fact that he was able to gather enough support to pass the civil rights act of 1964 with strong opposition of his southern base is a true testament to his skill. And this was before the Democrats made their massive gains in congress for the 1964 election.

      Sure if we had LBJ here today trying coral votes for ACA I'd say he'd do a little better than Obama but it would pale in comparison to what he was able to do in the 1960's. Having LBJ here today would be like having a senate leader like Reid or McConnell become president. Sure they'd have a little better leverage in the senate but I think the partisan gridlock today would greatly limit their ability to pass legislation.

      "It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument" ~William Gibbs McAdoo(D-CA)

      by lordpet8 on Thu Jul 18, 2013 at 07:24:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site