The Need to "Adapt the Presidency"

As we learned from Neustadt, the power of the presidency is the power to persuade. Well, what if the forum to persuade is limited?

On 60 Minutes tonight, in President Obama's first interview since the election last week, he addresses this confinement. Here's a short excerpt from the transcript:


NARRATION: ONE THAT HAS NOT BEEN OK WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE, HAS BEEN HIS EAGERNESS TO SPREAD HIS GOSPEL TO THE FAR REACHES OF BROADCAST /CABLE UNIVERSE. IT SEEMS LIKE HE HAS BEEN ALMOST EVERYWHERE. LENO AND LETTERMAN. MTV AND COMEDY CENTRAL, AMERICAS’ MOST WANTED AND THE VIEW. SOME HAVE FOUND IT DEMEANING AND UN-PRESIDENTIAL.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: The challenge right now, and you know this better than I do, than I do, Steve, is that—it used to be a President could call a press conference and the three major networks would come and he’d talk to them, and you pretty much reached everybody in America. And these days— the closest I can get to that is being on 60 Minutes.

But there are a whole bunch of folks— who watch The Daily Show¸ or watch The View. And— so I’ve got to adapt the presidency to reach as many people as possible— in as many— settings as possible so that they can hear directly from me.

Um, You know, but this is an example of where— on the one hand folks say, “Well, you know he’s a little too remote.” Then if I’m on The View, “Well, you know, he shouldn’t be— you know— on some daytime TV show

My attitude is— if I’m reaching people, if I’m talking to them, I’m willing to take the risks of— overexposure on that front.
-------

"Adapt the presidency". Obama's words suggest that he sees the need to re-shape the presidency as an institution. And in doing so, he furthers his effectiveness at the only power Neustadt suggests he has -- the power to persuade.

FDR used fireside chats. Kennedy was the first to hold a televised press conference. Embracing new media to shape public opinion is inevitable - so why is Obama villainized for going on The View?

-Shannon Ritchie

Short Term Memories

With Republicans taking control of the House and making ground in the Senate, the question I have to ask is: Do Americans have short term memories? It seems only yesterday when there was so much discontent with Republicans that Democrats were able to rise up and take control of Congress. Discontent with Obama is well deserved, but do Americans forget when the recession started? Do Americans forget who started the first bailout? It seems that George Bush went from the girlfriend we wanted to dump, to the girlfriend we feel bad we cheated on.

Of course, the average American simply does not understand the complexity of politics and policies in place. Frankly, we as MPP students barely understand it. Which leads me to my next point. Why are Democrats horrible at marketing themselves, their policies, and against Republican counterparts? It is obvious that Republicans and Tea Partiers are able to connect with the average American, referencing current politics with easy to understand symbolism like "waves" and "tsunami." Why don't Democrats pick up this lingo? Maybe they just need to hire a better political marketing team. I hear a lot of laid off MBA grads are looking for jobs.

Political chaos!

This week's This American Life had a neat little rundown of what is going on right now within each of the political parties. You can listen to it on thisamericanlife.org. What struck me is how impatient the Tea Partiers are to building a meaningful movement - their desire to have an immediate impact seems so much more important than really changing American politics the way they advertise - and how unwilling the Democrats are to build a coherent message. Would recommend it to everyone, even those having a hard time getting over the whole Juan Williams thing...

On symbolic messaging...

I just got an email from my Congressman, who is in a very tight race against a Republican state senator.

The email went out a few minutes before an in-district rally with President Obama (another pretty clear sign it's an extremely close race!) and included this line:

"Do we want to continue moving forward with progress on creating jobs, improving education, and building a clean energy economy? Or do you want to hand the keys back to people that drove our economy off a cliff?" (emphasis mine)

I remembered someone had used this line, almost verbatim, in our class discussion of messaging for the upcoming election cycle...sounds like we definitely had our finger on the pulse of the D-CCC!

Liz S

Negotiating the Deficit

This year’s campaign trail presents a unique opportunity for both Republicans and Democrats to highlight debt and deficit spending as a critical issue in this election.

Intervening Variable?

The Tea Party Movement coupled with the economic climate changed the pace of the debate. The Tea Party movement continues to raise awareness of government spending, prompting Americans to question how the government plans to pay for programs like ObamaCare and others in the future. Republicans view the movement as an intervening variable. As a result, Republicans heightened the importance of balancing the budget as a priority issue in state GOP platforms.

On the trail, rhetoric is the preferred weapon of choice . . .

Republicans capably use rhetoric in the debt/deficit debate; however, Democrats’ latest issue framing effectively combines elements of symbolism and rational frameworks to persuade voters.

Ironically, Democrats are indirectly responding to the issue. The Democrats’ tactics are resonating with voters who believe in the importance of fiscal responsibility, but not at the cost of critical entitlement programs.

A report from the Capital Journal mentions DNC funded TV ads accusing Republicans of undermining social security. Democrats in South Carolina ran an ad accusing the Republican candidate of trying to make Social Security “illegal.” The ad comes complete with pictures of an elderly woman posing for her mug shot at the police station.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704847104575531940955863592.html?mod=WSJ_NY_MIDDLEThirdStories

Mental Health Break
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfrDq7B6fh0&feature=related

Thanks

I dedicate this pithy post to our more conservative peers, whose views might differ from ours but whose values we must consider as we enter the wonderful bipartisan field of public policy.

It appears to me that many of the MPP students are liberal-minded or progressive. Within the context of public policy, we would want policies that espouse greater governmental control. However, many of the stakeholders and colleagues we will work with may advocate for policies that champion individual freedom, free enterprise, and a limited government. It is critical to be open-minded and flexible when influencing public policy. For this reason, I am extremely grateful for the colorful perspectives offered across this blog and in the classroom.

Happy Fall Break, everyone!

-Susan Chen

When Reelection Isn't a Concern

Harry Reid makes a smart pick with regard to TARP oversight:

Senator Kaufman Selected as New TARP Cop

This caught my eye for a number of reasons. First, Senator Kaufman is a Duke grad and Duke professor currently filling Vice President Biden's old Senate seat. Second, Senator Kaufman seems like a great pick for "TARP Cop" because he's not running for reelection and never actually ran for election in the first place. Matt Taibbi explains this better than I can:

"...Kaufman has been sort of a test case proving that legislators can actually do their jobs the way they are supposed to when you remove the need to constantly raise money from their job description. Kaufman didn't need to raise money for a run, because he was appointed, and didn't need to raise money for re-election, because he's stepping down. I don't think it's a coincidence that he's been the realest guy on the Hill on the Wall Street stuff (along with a few others like Bernie Sanders and Sherrod Brown). So it's definitely good to see him get the COP job."

So is Kaufman an example of a politician who is able to--because of a very unique set of circumstances--operate completely outside of Arnold's model? Would we all be better off if more members of Congress were similarly unconcerned with reelection? Would term limits do the trick? I don't know, but I sure hope he's around next year so I can take one of his classes and ask him.


Evan