The 2010 Elections Will Be a Referendum on Obama

August 27, 2010 RSS Feed Print

With less than 70 days to the Congressional midterm elections (not to mention 37 governors’ races), independent political handicappers are already predicting massive Republican gains in the House, Senate, and governors’ mansions. Several Democrats have already privately conceded some form of defeat and are working to mitigate what could be a seismic political shift.

[See a slide show of 5 key issues in the 2010 elections.]

To be fair, history is not on the Democrats’ side. The new president’s party has almost always lost seats in the midterms following the presidential election. To some extent, then, political realignment is to be expected. 

Yet as potentially disorganized as the Republican Party is, all GOP-ers, and even many Independents, appear united around one central tenant: their unhappiness with Barack Obama’s governing style during his 19 months in the White House. 

The man who campaigned on themes of “ending the partisan bickering” in Washington and “changing the way Washington does business” appears to have shed those promises upon inauguration and instead summoned his inner FDR. Determined to recreate a massive role for the federal government, Obama passed the largest economic “stimulus” in U.S. history. The economic news in the past week demonstrates that move was likely unwise. Unemployment remains near 10 percent, housing prices continue to plummet, and America’s standing as a financial power in the world is now, for maybe the first time in modern history, potentially in bona fide jeopardy.

Instead of working harder and smarter on jobs and the economy, Obama next set his sights on his golden calf: healthcare reform. Obama didn’t achieve his ultimate goal: a public option that would force American taxpayers to foot the bill for all the uninsured. Instead, however, he passed party-line legislation that thus far, has done nothing but anger and upset the states who now have to implement the massive federal legislation and confuse American citizens as to how and if the legislation affects them. Throw into the mix the CBO’s recent claim that the legislation will not, in fact, “bend the cost curve” over the long run (one of the primary selling points for passage), and one can’t help but question the wisdom behind the healthcare decision. 

[See a slide show of the 10 keys to an Obama comeback.]

We could go on--a financial reform package that threatens our nation’s economy at a fragile time, a sluggish and half-handed response to the oil spill in the Gulf, embarrassing failed bids at the climate change summit and Olympic selection committee, and the recent mosque gaffe. And we haven’t even touched on foreign policy.

As voters close the curtains the first Tuesday in November, it is difficult to imagine them rewarding President Obama and Speaker Pelosi (his partner-in-crime for most of these “achievements”) for their efforts. 

[See who supports Pelosi.]

Both of these top Democrats interpreted the 2008 elections as a mandate for an unprecedented expansion of the federal government, and in the process, forced far too much regulation down the throats of the American people. Their reward for this is potentially the loss of their majorities in both houses of Congress.

Sixty-eight days is still an eternity in politics, but, at this point, its hard not to envision some serious political backlash. 

Much like the signs we’ve all seen in expensive boutiques, “you break it, you buy it,” President Obama has no one to blame but himself and his political team for what will likely happen in November and, much like those signs, he will have to take responsibility for those losses.

Tags:
presidential election 2008,
2010 election,
Nancy Pelosi,
healthcare reform,
Congress,
economy,
economic stimulus,
Barack Obama,
healthcare

Reader Comments Read all comments (12)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

The internet is filled with lies about this case. That is one of the reasons that ONLY ultra-right wing lying propaganda blogs carry the "story." In fact, Obama, as well as other attorneys, represented a man, whose suit was certified as a class action by a US district court judge in 1995, because he and other minorities were denied mortgage loans by citibank that were given to white clients WITH THE SAME CREDIT SCORES. The bank was found to be in violation of the Fair Housing Act 1968 as well as other laws. The far right is lying that Citibank was being sued to force it to make subprime loans to cover CRA obligations. In fact this is an utter falsehood. The case had nothing to do with the CRA at all. Read an official legal summary of the case;

Case Name Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance

Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011

State/Territory Illinois

Case Summary

Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.

This case has received a good deal of press and blogger attention because one of the plaintiffs' lawyers was Barack Obama, then just a couple of years out of law school.

U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the plaintiffs' suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs' motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank's loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

The parties settled the case on May 12, 1998, with an agreement that provided for waiver of some fees for class members, should they reapply for a loan, and also for various procedures to ensure that Citibank followed its own loan policies in a race neutral way.

http://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=10112

Details of this case can be found at the link above.

steve of IL 5:49PM August 29, 2010

Lawyer obama along with Acorn threatened lawsuits on banks if more unqualified loans to poor was not done. That is not opinion nor speculation but fact. Cause of action was racism.

Here is solid evidence using court records:.

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/obama-sued-citibank-under-cra-to-force-it-to-make-bad-loans/

You respond saying ”smoke screen..” You can not dispute my evidence so you say “smoke screen”. Pitiful…

You change subject and go into another world. Can’t deal with lawyer obama’s part in the recession Samual Jones of NY.

Bill Hedges of MO 8:26AM August 29, 2010

Obama is no different then any other politician. This whole Acorn issue is a raciest smoke screen, its a way to keep Americans divided.

When someone starts bringing up obama, acorn, and racism, well you know where they are coming from.

Racism, bigotry, and hate still play big in the USA.

There are allot of Americans that have had their jobs sent overseas to slaves by a small minority of Corporate rich people.

The American people that have lost their jobs have to find someone to blame, so they watch fox news and are told to blame people of a different color and belief.

We have class war in the USA and have had so for a long time. . A very small minority of Corporate Rich are gutting the United States and sending our jobs over seas to slaves,

because they fear a American Middle class. The Rich want slaves, and will get slaves, no matter what!

What is going to happen to Americas Corporate Rich, when China's Generals decide they don't need the Corporate Rich anymore?

What will happen is the Corporate Rich will become feed for the live stock.

Samual Jones of NY 12:36AM August 29, 2010

Cameron Lynch

Cameron Lynch

Cameron Lynch is president the Lynch Group, a government relations, political consulting and government contracting firm. Formerly with the Bipartisan Policy Center, Lynch has worked for Sen. John McCain and former Sen. Bob Dole, among others. He teaches classes in political campaign strategy and historic Congressional agreements at the George Washington University Graduate School of Political Management.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Get God Out of the Gay Marriage Debate

The government shouldn't tell churches who they should marry, but neither should churches tell the government which marriages it can recognize.

Mary Kate Cary

Obama Attacks as Economic Cliff Looms

The president can't afford to talk about the economy, but with a 2013 fiscal time bomb approaching, the rest of us can't afford not to.

Latest Video

advertisement