Obama’s Solitude

This post is also available in: Español 

Christopher Dilts / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

As a student of history, Barack Obama knew that US presidents rarely have successful second terms. Obama was well aware that the crises of Watergate, the Iran-Contra scandal, the response to hurricane Katrina and the disastrous Iraq war had ended up tarnishing the second terms of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush.

Nonetheless, a year ago Obama believed he would somehow be able to avoid the “second term curse.” His remarkable personal biography and meteoritic rise to the presidency – reached despite little political experience and being an African-American in a country where racism persists – had perhaps convinced him that he would be an exception to the rule. That Obama was the first US president in more than five decades to win two terms with more than 50 percent of the popular vote was further proof that he could defy the odds.

But the first year of Obama’s second term has – sadly for him, and the country – followed the traditional pattern. With the exception of Nixon (who had to deal with deepening Watergate scandal), Obama has perhaps had the roughest start of a second term of any recent US president. The dramatic decline in Obama’s popular support – to less than 40 percent in several polls – just a year after soundly defeating Mitt Romney most closely parallels the downward trajectory followed by George W. Bush in his second term, which was marked by mounting opposition to the Iraq misadventure.

Obama famously proclaimed a year ago that, once reelected, he would be able to “break the fever” in Washington. This would mean working more closely with Republicans, reaching agreements on key issues, and no longer governing from crisis to crisis. If anything, however, the “fever” has intensified, and is now hotter than ever. Obama’s ambitious second-term agenda – from immigration reform to climate change to the closing of the US detention camp at Guantanamo Bay – has been frustrated.

With three years left in his term, many analysts are already calling Obama a “lame duck,” and believe that nothing of any consequence will be accomplished until the onset of the next presidential term in 2017.

What happened? A combination of unanticipated circumstances, the determination of Republicans, especially in the House of Representatives, to obstruct the president, and Obama’s own political weakness and self-inflicted errors – all of these help explain his troubles as he heads into the sixth year of his presidency. With three years left in his term, many analysts are already calling Obama a “lame duck,” and believe that nothing of any consequence will be accomplished until the onset of the next presidential term in 2017. The Economist cover story in November with a photo of Obama under water -- and with the title, “the man who used to walk on water”— illustrates the sharp drop.

Obama’s second term problems began even before his inauguration. CIA Director David Petraeus resigned because of an extramarital affair. The Republicans aggressively pursued the killing of the US ambassador and others in an attack at the US consul in Benghazi, Libya, which led Susan Rice (today Obama’s national security advisor) to withdraw her name from consideration for secretary of state, despite being the president’s top choice for the job.

In early 2013, moved by the shocking killing of 20 children and six adults at an elementary school in Newton, Connecticut, Obama put aside immigration reform – his chief legislative priority – to focus on enacting gun restrictions. The effort proved fruitless. Obama was further put on the defensive when it was revealed that the Internal Revenue Service had improperly monitored conservative groups, and the Justice Department had investigated US journalists. In June, when Edward Snowden started leaking highly sensitive and embarrassing National Security Agenda documents, the Obama administration’s troubles deepened, even affecting US-Russian relations at a critical moment. At the same time, the White House had admitted that Syria had crossed Obama’s “red line” and used chemical weapons. That led to a request to use military force that was roundly rejected by the nation and the US Congress.

Of course, it is impossible to understand Obama’s very difficult year and loss of political capital without emphasizing the Affordable Care Act, his signature achievement, enacted in 2010 and reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in 2012. On this issue more than any other, the Republicans have demonstrated their fierce determination to undermine and obstruct Obama.

What is widely known as Obamacare has, for the Republicans, become a proxy for big, intrusive government, intervening in citizens’ private affairs in a sector that accounts for nearly 20 percent of the US economy. Journalist Todd Purdhum, writing in Politico, pointed out that Obamacare has been met with “calculated sabotage by Republicans at every step.” Norman Ornstein, of the conservative American Enterprise Institute and an influential voice in Washington, has rejected the notion that everyone deserves equal blame for the sad state of political affairs. He has argued, rather, that the Republicans have been especially uncompromising and bear a greater responsibility than Democrats for creating such a polarized, poisonous political environment in Washington.

In early October, it was the partisan and ideological battle over Obamacare that resulted in an unprecedented impasse on funding for the US government and, ultimately, a shutdown. Such a shameful episode had a huge economic cost for the country, and politically was particularly damaging for the Republicans. Some figures from the hardline, intransigent “tea party” such as Republican Senator Ted Cruz from Texas were able to occupy the national spotlight (and raise a lot of money), but on balance Democrats reaped most of the political benefit from such an extreme overreaction.

But just as the Democrats prepared to capitalize on the fallout over the shutdown, the Republicans got their revenge with the terrible, embarrassing launching of Obamacare on October 1st. The problem was not only with the inexplicably flawed website, through which millions of Americans would purchase insurance. More crucially was the fact that many citizens got notices that their health insurance policies had been cancelled. Throughout his reelection campaign, Obama had repeatedly promised that with his health care reform Americans would be able to keep their doctors and insurance, but that turned out not to be true.

Obama thus entered more politically complicated territory. Whatever one thinks about Obamacare, questions were raised about Obama’s competence as a manager, and whether he could be counted on to tell the truth. For Obama, at this point in his second term, the most worrying poll numbers have to do with trust and credibility. Half the country now thinks of him as less than truthful.

Apart from some bad luck, unforeseen developments, and Republican obstructionism, Obama’s problems are self-inflicted. He can’t, for example, credibly blame the botched rollout of Obamacare on the Republicans. Obama’s cool, detached demeanor, widely seen as an asset in his first term, is now regarded as a liability. As Purdhum wrote in a November Vanity Fair article, “The Lonely Guy,” “Obama’s resolute solitude—his isolation and alienation from the other players and power centers of Washington, be they rivals or friends—has emerged as the defining trait of his time in office.”

The big question is whether Obama can regain the trust of the American people, especially his core constituency, including youth and Latinos, who have become disillusioned. This is the toughest task he faces.

In a recent interview, Leon Panetta, who served with nine US presidents and was CIA director and Secretary of Defense under Obama, lamented Washington’s increasingly nasty political environment. He praised Obama’s intelligence and instincts about what the US needs, but indirectly raised questions about his leadership. Referring to Washington, Panetta said, “This is a town where it’s not enough to feel you have the right answers. You’ve got to roll up your sleeves and you’ve got to really engage in the process .?.?. that’s what governing is all about.”

Can Obama recover? As the year ends, he has gotten some good news. There are signs the economy is picking up steam, with a rising stock market and declining unemployment. Democrats and Republicans reached a budget deal, which at least will avoid another government shutdown for the next two years. Also, in an effort to revitalize an administration that shows signs of exhaustion, Obama has reshuffled White House staff. And the Obamacare website is now working much better.

Further, Obama, whose political awakening came with the fight against apartheid in South Africa, was eloquent at Nelson Mandela’s memorial service. And if the agreement with Iran on its nuclear program works, that would give him a political boost. As often happens, second term presidents look to foreign policy to build their legacies.

The big question is whether Obama can regain the trust of the American people, especially his core constituency, including youth and Latinos, who have become disillusioned. This is the toughest task he faces. In this regard, history is not encouraging. But if Obama is able to rebound, it won’t be the first time he will have beaten the odds.