Reich on Obama

Robert Reich has a post that looks at Obama's performance as president. Here's the characterization that seems most appropriate to me:

My friend Sally also voted for Obama and still likes him, but she's increasingly upset about his policies. "He's giving away the store," she complains, pointing to his penchant for compromise. "He gave Wall Street $600 billion in bailouts and doesn't even want to regulate it, gave big polluters 85 percent of the cap-and-trade permits, and has promised the American Medical Association, Big Pharma, and private insurers whatever they want in return for their support of universal health care." Sally says she voted for Obama because he promised to change American politics, but she thinks corporate interests are more powerful than ever.

Sally also doesn't see why Obama is so bent on bipartisanship.

"Republicans haven't helped him a bit so far, won't help him, and he doesn't need their votes, so why compromise with them?"

And Reich identifies the key failure of Obama:

The widening gap between admiration for Obama and cynicism about his policies also reinforces passivity in Obama's base, which makes it even harder to advance a specific agenda. His presidential campaign strengthened the nation's political grass roots and spawned hope for a new era of public engagement, but Obama's reluctance to fight for any specifics is causing the base to lose interest. Neither the Freds who trust him nor the Sallies who have become cynical are motivated to do much of anything.

But their activism is crucial. If it comes to a choice between trust and cynicism, America will never achieve lasting change.

I'm in the camp that says he is headed toward a weak presidency. He may be the Jimmy Carter of the early 21st century, i.e. a "nice guy" who just couldn't get things done. Sad.