"Obama and the art of managing expectations"

Senior campaign adviser David Axelrod. (AP Photo/Brian Kersey)

Chris Cillizza (WaPo):

Obama and Axelrod are clearly engaging in a bit of expectations-management here — for largely strategic reasons. Why?

First and foremost, the tale of Obama’s first three years (or so) in office is that of a failure to meet impossibly high expectations. MORE...

Howie P.S.: Here's how Cilliza finishes his piece:

Expectations, as the Obama team learned over the past few years, are a dangerous thing in politics. Too high and you can’t meet them. Too low and people start believing you can’t change things. Can Obama and his team find an expectations middle ground for 2012?

"Chuck Todd's Interview with David Axelrod Oct. 26" (with video)

Today with President Obama with video from MSNBC, (10:19):

David Axelrod says Obama didn't endorse anyone in Rhode Island out of respect for Lincoln Chafee. In response to a NYT story that said a republican-controlled Congress would make a good foil for Obama, Axelrod says Obama doesn't need a foil.
Axelrod also answers David Brooks' recent column in which Brooks said the Obama administration spends too much time blaming the republicans. I don't think Obama would be pointing out the republicans if he wasn't always being blamed for their mess. Ironically, the people that created the recession are going to be put back in power because people lack a basic understanding of what happened to the economy.

Ezra Klein: "The disillusionment of David Axelrod"

Ezra Klein:

Noam Scheiber's profile of the disillusioned David Axelrod is worth reading. Axelrod, who's been hamhanded at best in his role as Special Envoy to the Professional Left, appears to share their critique of the administration almost entirely. He's presented as being uncomfortable with the concessions of governing, the power of the special interests, the paralysis of the Congress, the wages of pragmatism. He sounds, well, like a liberal.

I can't say whether Scheiber gets Axelrod right, but the article rings true: I've found Axelrod a puzzling spokesperson because he seems defensive over the administration's compromises rather than confident in their successes. Sharing in the critique he's rebutting would explain that ambivalence. “In terms of the short-term mentality, the unwillingness to take risks, the way every day is scored like the Super Bowl—all those things he believed, I think, have been confirmed in the extreme,” David Plouffe tells Scheiber. “But it’s not like he was caught by surprise. He understood that. It’s what he expected.”

So why didn't he do more to change it? MORE...

"What’s Eating David Axelrod?"

Noam Scheiber:

The disillusionment of Obama’s guru.---Back then, the details of Obama’s proposals had been less important than the way they advanced the broader narrative. Obama wouldn’t just tout the benefits of health care reform. He’d point out that every Democrat since FDR had tried and failed to bring universal coverage; only a different kind of politician could succeed. But, for all they have in common, Axelrod is a liberal with a populist streak; Obama is more of a technocrat who leans left but generally shuns ideology. When it came time to govern, the differences between the president and his top political adviser became harder to finesse.
(SNIP)
“If you were going to pick a moment when the whole thing turned on Obama,” says a longtime Democratic consultant, “it was the moment the administration saved the AIG bonuses.” MORE...

Booman on "Madrak and Axelrod"

Booman:

You gotta love Susie Madrak. She's not afraid of anyone. And what she told David Axelrod needed to be said. Ironically, I agree with both Susie and Axelrod on this subject. Susie's correct that treating us like the town ho isn't exactly motivating. Axelrod's correct to say, 'Hey, we feel like the town ho, too."

From the White House's perspective, there's this big progressive media outlet known as the blogosphere that is just blasting them day in and day out, when they thought they might get a little support to combat the Mighty Right-Wing Wurlitzer.

But, from the blogosphere's perspective, we're not seeing much love either. And forget about respect.

I think both sides have acted stupidly and with a lack of foresight. The number one thing the White House should have done differently is to level with people about the constraints they are facing in Congress. They should have done some coordination, basically telling us where progress was blocked and whose minds needed to be changed. But, really, with the need to hold together a center-left coalition, keep the Pentagon and Intelligence Community in line, maintain confidence on Wall Street, and engage in massive spending to keep the economy afloat, there was never much chance that progressives would be ecstatic about the results. Some of our advice should have been heeded, but a lot of it just wasn't politically possible.

On our side, though, we were far too quick to assign the worst motivations to the administration. We made ourselves their enemy and earned their enmity.

It's a two-way failure, as the exchange between Madrak and Axelrod crystallized. I hope people listen to what Axelrod had to say. But I'm also glad that Madrak had the balls to get in Ax's face.

"After Unemployment Extension, White House Shutting Down Stimulus Efforts" (with video)

David Dayen (FDL), with video from ABCNews (08:41):

David Axelrod appeared on This Week and acknowledged that the Administration has little chance of getting anything beyond an extension of unemployment benefits through Congress between now and the election. That extension would appear to have 60 votes whenever Robert Byrd’s replacement gets into the Senate. But that jobs bill that had all the tax extensions and infrastructure funding and summer job money? Forget it. Aid to state Medicaid programs? Isn’t going to happen. Extending the COBRA subsidy to keep the jobless covered? Nope. MORE...

"White House Is Pushing For Second Round of Stimulus Money For States And Cities" (with video)

David Axelrod on MTP, (Susie Madrak--Crooks and Liars) with video from MSNBC (03:26):

As progressives, bloggers and experts like Paul Krugman said at the time, cutting the stimulus package the first time around to make Republicans happy only weakened the stimulus effect to the point where it was enough to deter the worst effects of the financial crisis, but not enough to fix it. (Kind of like having a bacterial infection and taking half a dose of antibiotics.)

Krugman said then that he doubted the political climate would permit a later stimulus package, and he was right - which is probably why David Axlerod is tying himself in knots to avoid calling it that: MORE...

Chuck Todd Grills Axelrod on Obama and the BP Spill (video)

MSNBC, video (08:41).

Howie P.S.: Meanwhile, Jefferson Parish (LA) "officials commandeer BP's hired boats in Grand Isle."

"Whos' the Leading Man? It Ain't Rahm or Ax."

David Corn (Politics Daily):

Did you know that mega-film director James Cameron has infiltrated the White House? Yes, he lent Rahm Emanuel one of the "link" machines from "Avatar" that allows the White House chief of staff to "drive" another being -- and that being happens to be President Obama.

OK, not quite. But for some that has seemed to be the driving Washington narrative: the all-powerful White House chief of staff hijacking the presidency of the progressive-minded Obama. It's a popular explanation among liberals for their disappointment with Obama -- and for the president's failure to enact sweeping change (including historic health care reform) by now. And it makes a lot of sense -- from a Hollywood perspective. Practically every popcorn movie about the White House features a diabolical chief of staff. And Emanuel seems well cast for the part: the drama, the cursing, the bird of prey looks. There's also his politics. Ever since his service in the Clinton White House, Emanuel, a former investment banker, has been regarded (fairly or not) as a foe of progressive policy moves that don't have an obvious and immediate political gain.

So he's a natural scapegoat for frustrated Democrats. At the same time, Emanuel has found himself in the difficult position of the staffer who becomes the center of attention, particularly because of two stories in The Washington Post (which he may or may not have helped come into being). First, columnist Dana Milbank wrote a piece advancing the notion that Obama "would have been better off heeding Emanuel's counsel" in the first year. The column appeared to have been spurred by unidentified Emanuel fans, because it contained sentences like this one: "Obama's greatest mistake was failing to listen to Emanuel on health care."

In other words, the problem was that James Cameron's machine was not really working. And not long after that column, The Post ran a front-page news article that further reinforced this point. It reported: "Obama's first year fell apart in large part because he didn't follow his chief of staff's advice on crucial matters. Arguably, Emanuel is the only person keeping Obama from becoming Jimmy Carter." In this article, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat, was quoted as saying that Obama and his crew ought to listen to Emanuel because that would benefit "all our overall goals." It was almost as if she was chastising the president and taking sides. Unseemly?

Another turn in this Washington morality play -- or soap opera -- came on Sunday, with a New York Times front-pager that juxtaposed White House chief strategist David Axelrod, the ideologue, against Emanuel, the "pragmatist" -- even though Emanuel in this article cautioned journalists against placing White House aides "into boxes and categories that are just not accurate" and Axelrod maintained there is no "fissure with my buddy Rahm."

Still, the line seems to be drawn: Rahm vs. Ax. Take your pick -- and keep that backbiting gossip flowing, for the politerati relishes it. But there's someone missing from this picture: their boss. It's true that people make policy. But Obama is a brainy president capable of rendering big and tough calls on his own. He didn't need Emanuel to tell him that dumping single-payer would be a safe and conventional move. He didn't need Axelrod to advise him that pushing for sweeping reform would define his presidency. It's hard to imagine Obama being led along by either fellow.

The two men share responsibility for how the Obama presidency functions. They have jobs to do, and these tasks can be performed well or poorly. Previous White House chiefs of staff and message people have screwed up. But Obama is responsible for shaping his presidency.

Emanuel might, as The Post reported, have worried that placing 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed on trial in a New York City civilian court would trigger political problems for the administration. And Axelrod might have backed Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to proceed in this fashion. But Obama was the decider. He let Eric Holder call this one, presumably having a good clue what he would do. Every White House experiences deep and profound policy debates. Ultimately, that's what's important-- what's decided, not who pushed it.

If anyone needs an Oscar movie reference, perhaps a better one would be "The Hurt Locker," the Best Picture. In that film, Sgt. 1st Class William James is part of a bomb-disposal team in Iraq, but he's the only member of the crew who has to confront the toughest choices: which wire to cut, when to take a chance, when to run. That's Obama. There's plenty of story in the tale of a powerful White House chief of staff, but if anyone is looking for someone to hold accountable for the current state of the Obama presidency, it's the star of the production.

Howie P.S.: What's "driving the game" is the disconnect between the perceived rules of the game between "inside" the Beltway and "outside." Obama is supposed to be the crazy glue keeping it all together. Markos is all over Kucinich for taking a "very Ralph Nader-esque approach" to politics by opposing the current bill. John Nichols has Kucinich's back. Ari Melber Tweets: "A word on Kucinich: Legislative Naderism is quite different, and potentially more effective, than electoral Naderism."

"Axelrod Pressed By Franken, Sanders On White House's Lack Of Leadership On Health Care"

Sam Stein (HuffPo):

Shortly after Barack Obama addressed a Senate Democratic caucus meeting and urged them to push health care reform forward, one of the chamber's most progressive members took the president's closest adviser aside and asked him why the White House wasn't doing more to help.

Sens. Al Franken (D-Minn.) put pointed health-care-related questions to senior adviser David Axelrod following Obama's speech, multiple sources tell the Huffington Post. He was echoed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-V.T.) The gist of their concern was that the administration has not shown enough leadership to get legislation passed through Congress in the wake of the party's defeat in the Massachusetts Senate election. Franken insisted that "he really needed to know if the White House was going to lead," according to one Democratic aide.

Axelrod, by several accounts, didn't give a response that Franken found sufficient. And as the two continued to talk, Sanders eventually jumped in.

"My message is that the current strategy is failing and we have to stop being on the defensive," Sanders said, in a statement to the Huffington Post. "We also need to realize we're not going to get 60 votes for anything, so we have to look at a very broad, omnibus-like reconciliation bill -- including health care and jobs -- that will pass the Senate with 51 votes."

Details of what transpired after that are scant. Axelrod, meanwhile, did not immediately return a request for comment.

In expressing their concern, Franken and Sanders become the second and third progressive Democratic senator to critique the White House's role in the current health care reform debate. In an interview with HuffPost on Thursday, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), likewise, said that the president's involvement in negotiations has "dried up" since the Massachusetts election.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked about the growing dissatisfaction with the role the administration is playing during Thursday's daily briefing.

"Well look," he replied, "obviously the president has said in the State of the Union... the president say... obviously the problem exists, it continues to exist -- higher costs, small businesses struggling. That was the case before Massachusetts. That was the case after Massachusetts. I still think that the process is working its way through Capitol Hill."

"I didn't believe that the president was less involved last year since we wouldn't have gotten where we were if the president hadn't been involved," Gibbs concluded.

Howie P.S.: Gibbs' comment is off-topic. This is not about "last year."

"Sunday Roundup: White House And Howard Dean Turn Down Heat" (Updated)

UPDATE: Joe Sudbay (AMERICAblog) isn't buying the idea that the health care debate is cooling down: "Joe Biden Meet Ben Nelson."

Greg Sargent:

The White House is clearly softening its rhetoric against Howard Dean, in an apparent effort to turn down the heat of their fight now that the bill appears to be clearing the Senate and needs support from House liberals.

On NBC this morning, David Axelrod went out of his way to say, “I respect Howard Dean,” describing him as “passionate” about the issue. Meanwhile, Joe Biden wrote an Op ed saying: “I respect his leadership on health care, and I understand his criticism of the bill.”

That’s after Robert Gibbs suggested that Dean was “irrational.”

* Meanwhile, on NBC, Dean conspicuously declined to say that Obama had failed to fight hard enough for core liberal priorities — a frequent criticism on the left. Asked about this line, Dean reiterated his substantive criticism of the bill, but added: “He certainly tried very hard.” And he declined to call outright for the bill to be killed.

* In his Op ed Biden made an interesting point, noting that the Senate bill accomplishes more health care reform than Vermont did while Dean was governor, and does it for the whole country.

* On CNN this morning, Axelrod made a rather bold prediction, saying Dems would do very well in 2010. He said that the polls “will take care of themselves” over time if the White House and Dems keep focusing on strengthening the “basic pillars of a middle class life.” Said Axelrod: “Talk to me next October.”

* Senator Richard Burr, who’s well-known for his concern for the political health of Democrats, predicts political disaster for Dems if they pass the health care bill. Says he: “The lines are drawn.” Indeed.

* Rahm Emanuel defends the President against charges that imperfect outcomes on climate change and health care prove he doesn’t fight hard enough for core liberal goals:

In an interview, Mr. Emanuel said the developments showed that Mr. Obama“sets out the North Stars for us” in terms of broad and ambitious goals, but is willing to let his staff and allies haggle over the specifics. “He doesn’t negotiate the ends,” Mr. Emanuel said. “He’s very open to discussing alternative routes.”

But some would say Obama’s unwillingness to “negotiate the ends” is precisely the problem. The only thing that can settle this argument is the sum total of what Obama has accomplished once his presidency is over.

* On the day after Senate Dems reached a deal quite likely to result in the passage of a monumental health care reform bill Obama has sought, David Broder argues that Obama is in severe trouble with Congressional Dems and that things have only begun to tank.

* Ezra Klein tells you what’s important in the Manager’s Amendment.

*

And apropos of nothing, the most popular post on CNN’s Political Ticker right now: “Palin Continues To Blast Climate Change Believers.”

What else is happening?

"David Axelrod And Howard Dean To Duke It Out On Meet The Press"

Greg Sargent:

NBC News emails the line-up for Meet the Press this Sunday, and it includes:

David Axelrod
White House Senior Adviser

Dr. Howard Dean
Fmr. Chair, Democratic National Committee
2004 Democratic Presidential Candidate
Fmr. Governor of Vermont

An NBC spokesperson confirms that Axelrod will be on first, followed by Dean. Should be must-watch TV, and very high-stakes: A lot riding on who wins this argument over the long term.

Axelrod: "Killing health care would be 'tragic'" (with video)

MSNBC-Morning Joe, video (10:23).

Howie P.S.: Axelrod charged that Howard Dean's opposition is based on "erroneous conclusions." Ed Schultz challenged Axelrod's claims that the bill will foster competition and choices for people who will face a mandate to purchase health insurance. Howard Dean came on to say the "health bill can still be saved;" video (15:22).

"War over health care turns ugly" (video)

MSNBC-Countdown, video (09:27).

Howie P.S.: David Axelrod talks with Richard Wolffe about the fight for health care reform. Wolffe talks about efforts by health care reform opponents to disrupt congressional town meetings during the August recess. This may explain why in the Evergreen state

"after fairly methodical searching of the Web sites of both senators and, more important for the health care debate, Congressman Reichert, I can't find any mention of constituent meetings in the state scheduled for August."

Or maybe they just want to avoid meeting with their constituents outside the Beltway and are in hiding at some undisclosed locations. Wolffe and Howard Fineman also report on the opponents' efforts to turn "Health care into health scare" (video, 05:56).

Ax on MTP: "Stimulus is where it should be" (video)

NBC, Meet the Press, video (06:34).


Barack Obama

"The view from my chair at MTP "

David Gregory takes advantage of Twitter to share his view. I am waiting for this morning's David Axelrod interview to go online. In the meantime, here's his mother in the Boston Globe with "For her, it's also 'hail to my son'--Newton woman recounts stories of key Obama adviser."

Barack Obama

BREAKING: STIMULUS BILL IS NOW LAW--Friday the 13th Stimulus Roundup (excerpts with video)

BREAKING: "Senate Passes The Economic Stimulus Bill."

David Axelrod: Bush "classy," Cheney "tasteless," Rove "amazing", WaPo (Lois Romano), video (03:50.)

John Cole: "It’s The Politics, Stupid," (Balloon Juice):

Krugman has basically spent the past few weeks arguing for a much, much larger stimulus bill, something on the order of double what we got now, and without as many tax cuts and with far more direct spending. The very first thing I remember him saying about the bill was that it was a disappointment, and this was before he even knew what was in it. And for all I know, he may be right- that may be what the economy needs, the current bill may be inadequate, and so on.

But the point remains that a larger bill was not politically feasible. At all. The current bill just barely is getting the support from the three Republicans it needs, and this is after hundreds of hours of bickering, of paring down spending, and so forth.

Booman: "More on Demagoguery" (Booman Tribune):

The Republican coalition is built of necessity. There are few other ways for Wall Street bankers to compete for majorities than to ally themselves with religious populism. The Democratic coalition is purely ad hoc, and it will remain a fluid and divisive Babel of voices and concerns so long as no single constituency is strong enough to dominate.

What Greenwald and Judis are saying is that the Left is so enthralled with Obama that they are giving him a pass rather than pushing hard for him to move to the left. And without sustained and vocal advocacy from the Left, Obama will stay where he is or move to the right.

Here's where it gets tricky. Part of what Greenwald and Judis say is inarguable. But when it comes to individual voices (columnists, bloggers, talking heads), it's important that we remember one thing. If you lie, exaggerate, distort, or dissemble about the facts in order to push for a better policy outcome, you will lose your credibility.

Howie P.S.: I know it won't be law until Obama signs it, but still...

Barack Obama

"Axelrod Defends Handling of Bailout Plan" (video)

.
WaPo, video (04:27).

Howie P.S.: Axelrod talks about the roll-out of the "plan to rescue the nation's financial system."

H/t to Ari Melber.

Barack Obama

"David Axelrod Talks to The Page" (video)

Mark Halperin--The Page (TIME), video (01:29).

Barack Obama

"Axelrod tells NPR he's willing to go more than halfway on Michigan and Florida"

Avi Zenilman (Ben Smith's Blog):

NPR just sent out a press release with excerpts of an interview Obama Chief Strategist David Axelrod gave "All Things Considered" host Michele Norris, where he seemed to open the door to a deal on Michigan and Florida:

"We are open to comprise [sic]. We are willing to go more than half way. We're willing to work to make sure that we can achieve a compromise. And I guess the question is: is Senator Clinton's campaign willing to do the same?"

Axelrod continues: "Well, obviously, any compromise is going to involve some give, and that means if there's something on the table, we're willing to consider it. That may include us yielding more delegates than perhaps we would have, simply on the basis of the rules."[

This comes after Clinton compared the fight for the rogue delegations to the civil rights movement earlier today . David Kuhn and I noted a couple weeks ago that sitting Florida and Michigan wouldn't change the underlying dynamic of the race.

Howie P.S.: More people are starting to figure that out.