RICHARD WOLFFE

SCHLUB, RIGHT?

Thu, 15 Sep 2011 14:10:02 -0400

That didn’t take very long. Just three months after he was a shoo-in for his reelection, President Obama is now a hopeless failure who has apparently lost the support of his base, the Democratic elites, Jewish voters in New York City and the entire state of California.
The Obama pendulum of triumph and defeat seems to move increasingly fast as the election looms ahead. Given that it’s another 14 months before that election, we can safely assume that the pendulum will only increase in velocity.
First some context. Obama won in 2008 by a massive 7-point margin. President Bush won his re-election in 2004 by what was considered a wide margin of less than 2.5 points.
The margin of error in most polls is plus or minus 3 points. That means anything less than the 2008 landslide is within the margin of error. In all likelihood, we’re looking at a contest that is well within the polling margin of error, and probably close to the 2004 model.
So for now, the head-to-head polls against the GOP’s leading candidates look pretty healthy for the president. Next year is a long way off, and these polls are all but useless. But the snapshot still provides a sharp contrast to the current conventional wisdom. Obama is ahead of Rick Perry, the GOP frontrunner, by between 8 and 11 points. Less than a month ago, the race was effectively tied. Some polls even showed Perry ahead by a handful of points at the time.
However, that is a contest which has yet to play out fully. What about Obama’s approval numbers. Haven’t they been tanking? Three months ago, the president’s approval rating was over 50 per cent. Today it has, according to the latest polls, dropped six or seven points to the mid-to-low-40s, which is a fairly steep decline.
But step back a little, and it looks like very little has changed. According to Gallup, Obama’s average approval rating in 2011 is 46 per cent. Last year it was 46.8 per cent.
That’s not great. But it’s also not exactly a collapse.
Ah yes, but what about the economy? He’s tanking on the economy, right? Voters repeatedly, insistently say that is the most important issue by far. And unemployment remains painfully, stubbornly high. So it stands to reason that Obama’s numbers are terrible.
Up to a point, Lord Copper.
According to the latest CNN/Opinion Research polling, Obama’s approval ratings stand at the middling number of 45 per cent. But when asked who they trust to handle the economy, voters give Obama a 9-point lead over the GOP: by 46 to 37 points.
What do you mean? The Republicans have not won the economic debate already? Seems not.
How about we slice it this way: which is more important - jobs or deficits? By a two-to-one margin, jobs. What about the ideas in Obama’s jobs speech: cutting payroll taxes, money to keep teachers and firefighters in work, infrastructure spending, and more aid to the unemployed? Turns out that all these measures have majority support, from 52 per cent (helping the unemployed) to 74 per cent (keeping teachers in their jobs).
One final poll-shaped thought. You could be forgiven for thinking that people are less than enthusiastic about Obama winning re-election. Strange, but that pesky CNN poll found this: 52 per cent are either pleased or excited by the prospect of his re-election. That compares to 48 per cent who are either displeased or angry at the thought.
Now what do those numbers remind me of? Oh yes. The results of the last presidential re-election, when a battered incumbent won relatively comfortably.

SHOO-IN OR SCHLUB?

Fri, 3 Jun 2011 09:59:11 -0400

In the endless cycle of triumph and disaster, revival and survival, that defines Obama’s political career, we have reached this point: either he’s a shoo-in for reelection next year, or he’s a total schlub at this presidential thing.
First the case for the shoo-in. According to recent polls, the president’s approval rating is over 50 per cent now, including the most recent CNN/Opinion Dynamics survey which puts him at 54 per cent. Considering where he was just six months ago, during the great Republican comeback of 2010, that’s positively Reaganesque.
Combine that with Obama’s newfound confidence in telling the story of Detroit’s survival - thanks to his rescue package and restructuring - and you have something you can run on. Not least because Republicans wanted to see the carmakers go bust. It will be fascinating to see the GOP candidates defend that position while campaigning in places like Toledo, Ohio, where the president is visiting Chrysler suppliers today.
And we haven’t even begun to talk about the GOP’s dissatisfaction with their own presidential field.
Now the case for the schlub. Turns out the same CNN/Opinion Dynamics poll has just 39 per cent of voters saying the country is on the right track. Not surprising when you see the kind of weak job growth in the private sector (made worse by layoffs in the public sector) in today’s payroll numbers for the month of May.
Of course there’s at least one good reason to doubt the schlub theory: the nature of the people predicting Obama’s doom. Thanks to David Frum for pointing out this wonderful piece of conservative fantasy/hysteria from just one year ago.
I think the esteemed American Spectator needs to consider whether to keep killing trees for this kind of crap. Or at least whether to keep paying one Peter Ferrara - who works at both the Heartland Institute and the American Civil Rights Union - for writing things like “The Coming Resignation of Barack Obama”. That’s right up there with Dow 36,000, written by two Bush advisers.
Here are the first two paragraphs of this doozy:
“Months ago, I predicted in this column that President Obama would so discredit himself in office that he wouldn't even be on the ballot in 2012, let alone have a prayer of being reelected. Like President Johnson in 1968, who had won a much bigger victory four years previously than Obama did in 2008, President Obama will be so politically defunct by 2012 that he won't even try to run for reelection.
“I am now ready to predict that President Obama will not even make it that far. I predict that he will resign in discredited disgrace before the fall of 2012. Like my previous prediction, that is based not just on where we are now, but where we are going under his misleadership.”
Oh please, American Spectator: Please keep on making predictions. We all could do with the laugh. It makes up for the grim job numbers.

REVIVAL 2.0

Thu, 2 Jun 2011 16:55:42 -0400

We’re just a week or so away from the release of my new eBook edition, Revival 2.0, which updates Revival with lots of new insight and reporting.
Why a new eBook release? Because after Revival was published in mid-November, the White House staged one of those - how to put it? - revivals. A stunning political comeback, if you will. And the story of how that happened says something bookishly profound about this President and his team. Oh yeah: it has also reshaped the Republican presidential race in 2012.
Revival 2.0 is selling at the ridiculously low price of just 99c. Naturally I think my writing is worth a lot more. But my publisher insists on a bargain.
It’s available via Kindle (and the Kindle app), iBooks, on Barnes and Noble’s Nook, and any other way we can reach your eBook reader.
For those who want more, here’s the press release from Crown, my publisher:
Bestselling Obama biographer, award-winning journalist and political analyst for MSNBC Richard Wolffe will write an original eBook edition to be titled Revival 2.0: How the Obama White House Is Making Its Political Comeback. The book will be released on June 10, 2011, priced at 99 cents and available from all online retailers.
Revival 2.0 tells the dramatic inside story of how President Barack Obama learned to fight for his political survival. The book follows Obama and his relationships with his inner circle, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, Senior Strategist David Axelrod, Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett, and former campaign manager David Plouffe, from the Democrat’s defeat in the 2010 midterm elections through their surprising resurgence over the last six months.
President Obama begins his re-election campaign in a far stronger position than anyone thought possible just six months ago. His most recent revival is merely the most dramatic in a series of epic highs and lows that have followed him from his 2008 campaign into the White House. Each successive revival has been followed quickly by yet another desperate struggle for survival. Wolffe writes. “It took an historic shellacking to force him–or allow him—to revive the campaign spirit of compromise and reform.”
Drawing on key sources within the West Wing, Wolffe reveals: insights into the president’s reaction to the killing of Osama bin Laden, which has solidified his stature as commander-in-chief in the war on terror; the inside story of the overhaul of senior White House staff —from the departure of Rahm Emanuel and Robert Gibbs to the arrival of Bill Daley and Jay Carney; how the White House surprisingly achieved historic change (including the START treaty and “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal) through a lame-duck Congress, and positioned itself to fight with the new Republican-controlled House over looming budget battles and a defense of their health care reform; the contentious internal debate over the response to the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya; the campaign strategy for the 2012 election as told directly by Obama’s top campaign team—David Axelrod and David Plouffe.
An intelligent, deeply informed, up-to-the-minute guide, Revival 2.0 is a must-read to understanding how Obama has found a way to lead effectively and prepare for next year’s elections.
Richard Wolffe is an award-winning journalist and political analyst for MSNBC and the author of Renegade: The Making of a President and Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House.

A RENEGADE'S REVIVAL

Mon, 2 May 2011 09:17:57 -0400

This is a great day for anyone touched by 9/11 and terrorism, the world over. The death of a mass murderer is a bittersweet moment: a time to celebrate justice and commemorate those we have lost.
It’s also a time to consider the characters who made it happen.
Nothing about a president really compares to the courage and skill of those who executed the mission in Pakistan, or even those who commanded the operation. But the test of presidential leadership is real nonetheless.
You would hope that a long election campaign could serve as a useful predictor of leadership potential for just this kind of moment. So it is with the man the Secret Service calls Renegade.
The operation to kill Osama bin Laden was both a case of bold risk-taking and carefully-planned process. Barack Obama has always combined a Renegade’s risk-taking with a deep sense of caution: he makes a handful of big gambles but does so with extreme care.
From what we know of the events leading up to the raid on bin Laden’s compound, that was true in this historic, defining moment too. This was a mission that began last summer, and took months to come to its careful climax. But given a choice between the safety of a huge aerial attack - with large civilian deaths - and a dangerous, targeted raid, President Obama chose the kind of risk-filled operation that could have ended in military and political disaster.
This is the time to bury the comparisons to Jimmy Carter, which the right and left continually resurrect in analyzing President Obama. It is past time to drop the talk of weakness or inaction; of bowing to foreign leaders and being soft on terrorists and radical Islamists?
This mission was not the result of some late conversion to national security or some delayed understanding of the role of a commander-in-chief. As a candidate, Obama said he would end the war in Iraq to refocus on Afghanistan and target Al Qaeda’s leadership. He has clearly done all three in the Oval Office.
The threat of terrorism is not over, and nor is the war in Afghanistan. But that long war is surely on track to begin winding down this summer, as the president promised when he decided to treble the number of troops there, almost 18 months ago.
This mission is also a vindication of one of Obama’s clearest policy reversals - indeed, the reversal which has most dismayed parts of his base: his refusal to investigate and prosecute Bush-era torture, and his inability to close Guantanamo Bay.
Obama’s reversal was designed to protect the CIA and the broader community of intelligence and special operations. Without them - and without a cooperative relationship with the White House - there could be no effective counter-terrorism. Pragmatism may involve abandoning principled positions and powerful rhetoric. But it can also lead to the kind of special operation that will take its rightful place alongside the Israeli rescue at Entebbe, Uganda, and the SAS storming of the Libyan embassy in London.
All presidents surely enjoy too much credit when events go right, and suffer too much blame when events go wrong. President Obama may enjoy too much credit for bin Laden’s death and too much blame for a sluggish economy.
Yet this is clearly a historic turning point for this presidency. A revival that began after November’s shellacking has now gained critical mass. It has been marked by big gambles, meticulous planning, and several setbacks. There is no guarantee of what will happen to the President between now and next year’s election. But this Revival does cement his place in history.

RESURRECTION OR REVIVAL?

Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:22:54 -0500

When Revival was published, two weeks after the Democrats’ mid-term shellacking, some people suggested the book title was – how to put this politely? – stupid. My beloved reviewer in the Washington Post scoffed at the very notion of an Obama comeback, declaring that the word ‘revival’ was best associated with the Republicans.
It took all of a month for President Obama to turn that conventional wisdom on its head with what amounts to a second stimulus for the economy: his sweeping tax deal with Republicans. That deal began an extraordinary run of big wins for the White House including the nuclear START treaty with Russia and repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
By the first days of January, Obama’s approval rating hit the all-important mark of 50 per cent for the first time since the spring, according to Gallup. Suddenly the conventional wisdom declared President Obama to be the comeback kid, just like President Clinton. Even Frank Rich at the New York Times, who is hardly an Obama pushover, declared it a “resurrection.”
I prefer the word “revival.”
How predictable was this? Funny you should ask, because it’s the thesis of Revival. There have been repeated, huge swings of the political pendulum for this president, from defeat to victory and back again, with little in between.
It happened through the course of the 2008 campaign, and it happened once again at the one-year anniversary of his inauguration (the time period covered in the book). Obama’s campaign flat-lined in 2007, then triumphed in Iowa. He couldn’t close the deal in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and he was emasculated by Sarah Palin’s nomination. Except he closed the deal in North Carolina, and his manhood survived into the Oval Office.
Obama’s presidency was over when the Democrats lost the Massachusetts senate seat, and health care was officially pronounced dead. Until he signed it into law two months later, marking the culmination of a Democratic dream and the enduring monster of Republican nightmares.
Revival was intended as a roadmap to understanding this White House and this president: a way to figure out what happened and what lay ahead. There will surely be several defeats and comebacks before the next election. But the revival of the start of 2010 stands as the measure of who Obama is and how he governs.

REVIVAL IDEAS PART TWO

Tue, 7 Dec 2010 12:16:57 -0500

Here is the second take of your Revival advice for President Obama. Your thoughts on what’s gone wrong - and right - over the last two years. And what he could/should do to stage his own Revival.
Keep ‘em coming!

We need to put our positive pressure on Congress to pass legislation. Each victory makes the Dems and Pres. stronger. The GOP is exploiting "anger." We need to overcome their negative passion with our own positive passion. We can help with the tooting of horns! Here's a wonderful list of the accomplishments of the 111th Congress, posted by another fb friend. Let's spread the word.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/161270

Janice Mowrey

Use your bully pulpit and speak out! it's not about being a wonk, it's about being a leader and bringing us all together for common purposes

Stephen Rhymer

Right now, Fox news is one of the major outlets controlling the narrative to their base (but more importantly to independents that look to Fox News for information)- it's also an outlet that is very accessible to the White House. If Mister Obama were to do regular interviews with Chris Wallace and Bill O'reilly- he would begin to mitigate the potency of their message. After two years of such a strategy, the effects would not be insignificant. During the campaign, Mister Obama stated that he would sit down with his enemies for talks without precondition. It would appear that this is a situation where that ideology would be well heeded.

Christopher Allen

Start tooting your own horn. Parts of "Obamacare" (yes, I use that term sarcastically) that are extremely beneficial to seniors and parents of kids under the age of 26 are going into effect now. Point this out to the American public. Repeatedly.

Lori McNew Wcisel

Go LEFT to meet his base and stop pandering to the right, they are never gonna like him.

Ursula Delaney

First of all, reaffirm what he believes in, and then release, some way or another, what he's actually done since he has been elected. Avoid mistakes such as appearing in front of a window after a blow... Look strong, self-confident despite opposition, and go on speaking to all Americans with hope, faith and truth. Explain what was left when he arrived at the White House. And also explain what the crisis is about, what are the choices in such an era, why people must remain confident in his molicy, what he's going to do to make the economy stronger and to offer more jobs, which efforts must be done from everyone... and maybe do that with experts nearby, you know that kind of special show (it's never been done, I think) where the President speaks to the Nation in a true but reaasuring way, with debates between experts, and President Obama giving his feelings and intention. Stand to his promises and remind him of the title of his second book - for himself and for the rest of the nation. The Right wil never admit he's 'right' but those in the middle, who keep changing their minds all the time, or those who haven't bothered voting, especially the young generation, can still be gathered under his banner... and that's worth fighting for that!

Emma Desquins Deregnaucourt

Here's an idea: That we the people stop being complicit in creating the very conditions we claim we deplore. That we stop playing the blame game and looking for heroes where there are none to be found. Voting in an election and believing that Obama (or any other elected representative) is the end-all answer is either naive, or lazy, or intellectually dishonest, or all of those things. Our nation's politicians, whatever their good intentions, came to power because corporate money put them there, on *both* sides of the aisle. And until that changes, we will not see "change," but political theater and back-and-forth blame and bickering that only further empowers the de facto political power: corporations. Let's stop looking for heroes and villains and look in the mirror. Let's stop spending our own money in ways that empower the corporations that are running this country via the political process (and running this country into the ground): big banks, big oil, big food, big pharma, big health care, big media. Until we do *that* much as individuals - by voting with our wallets in lifestyle decisions we make every day - middle management types like our dear president will have no chance to effect real or lasting change. And there can be no "revival" of any sort beyond political stagecraft.

Kelly Neill

I would just say NO!!!. Get a SET of you know what and as Michael Douglas said in the movie " I AM THE PRESIDENT!!!! I am entitled to dream aren't I? :)

Jared Freedman

Simply to do what he said he was going to do, this is the reason we voted for him, do not let the republicians make you CHANGE!!!

Sheila Elhilaly

Stop asking the opposition to work with us. They are not going to do it. That's their whole strategy. Get it?

Diane De Martini

REVIVAL IDEAS PART ONE

Sun, 5 Dec 2010 14:28:41 -0500

Here is the first take of your Revival advice for President Obama. Your thoughts on what’s gone wrong - and right - over the last two years. And what he could/should do to stage his own Revival.
I’ll continue to gather your advice here on this website, whenever my book tour gives me the time to do so. Please carry on sending me more advice to the President at richard@richardwolffe.com, on twitter @richardwolffedc, or on Facebook. And I’ll still tweet the best ones as we go along.
My apologies to those of who tried to leave comments here on this site. Blame Apple and it’s closed design. Try email instead, and keep ‘em coming anyway!
In no particular order...

I wish President Obama would use his friendly media more. Republicans are dominating the debate by going on Fox or on right wing talk shows (90%of which are conservative). Most Americans are not hearing the other side, yet he rarely chats with anyone on MSNBC or HuffPost or TalkingPointsMemo or other places that might tell his side of the story. He also needs much stronger and more articulate surrogates, who can respond when conservatives lie about his policies-- most Americans think he raised their taxes because that is all they hear over and over. And finally, while I would love to see the Republicans and Democrats shake hands and work together, it ain't gonna happen. Instead of trying to make nice to the Republicans, he needs to understand they will NOT compromise or help him, so he needs to find solutions without them or work around their intransigence. People need to perceive that he is DOING something. Gridlock only helps his political enemies, sad to say.
Donna Halper

Call me old fashioned, but an old fashioned populism is what I think would work for Obama politically AND economically. It would be a two-front "revival," kinda like the two wars we are in overseas. One front is jobs, to work to get American business tax incentives to stay here and create jobs. This would work much the way it works in many states where businesses are "rewarded" for the assets they have in use in a given state. The bigger your formula of plant, equipment, and payroll is located "here" (state or nation), the bigger your tax reduction is. We need tax penalties, not credits, for shipping production out of the country.
The second front is Wall Street. They are the enemy largely responsible for the bad economy at the middle class level, stealing our home values and our retirement accounts. A populist, pro-worker, anti-banker robust financial regulatory regime would be hugely popular and also might do some good economically as well, getting more credit flowing, etc. Though I wasn't born then, Roosevelt's 1932 (?) speech in Madison Square Garden rings so true down through the ages. Obama needs to "welcome their hatred." Now that would be a revival! I am not holding my breath, however.
Dana Reynolds, Minneapolis

Fight.
Anderson Brown

Speak up louder and more often!! Get a FOX news station on his side;-))
Tina Bennett Goff

Be true to yourself...keep the faith...we've got your back...
April Lyn Whitlock

Stop being so conciliatory. Realize that they hate you and that they are going to fight you tooth and nail regardless of what you do. Fight for what you know is right and what the people who sent you there had in mind when they did so. Do not move right any farther because you will lose your base and do not act like such a wimp or you will lose much of the public. Americans like to see someone who knows what they stand for and is willing to fight for it, so keep that in mind. Americans also liked the guy they saw during the campaign. Try to be more like that guy from now on and you will be rewarded for it.
John Ryan Chaffin

Continue to be the leader you are. Do not be discouraged by the negativity and criticism. Be the man we elected. Stand strong; continue to press for what you know to be the right thing to do for the country. Do not give in to the desire to be bi-partisan to the point that you lose your way. Remember what you have already accomplished and keep fighting for the American people. We believe in you! Yes You Can!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Becky Kane

Nothing he does or says will make his opponents happy. That is obvious. The gap between the President and his opponents is widening, getting deeper and more distinct. He outshines his opponents with each passing day because the distinction gets greater and greater. I think he's shown himself to be an honourable and by-partisan man. Mr. President, it's time. It's time to do the right thing. The right thing is to do what you do best. Charge! Charge to the goal. The goal you know you want. That goal is what your supporters want. The goal of fighting for the people. Stop fighting for by-partisanship. It won't happen. It's time to fight for those who voted you into office. We are here for you, supporting you every step of the way. We know who you are and we pray for you daily. Don't look back. Just do it. Go. NOW!

Janet Conrad

Face down the Republicans and stop taking their crap. if the Republicans don't respect him as a man, they must be forced to respect the office. As an old TV show used to say, it's time to stop being polite and time to start living in the Real World. Get rid of the entire economic team, anyone who smells of Wall Street, Goldman Sachs, everyone. They are putting a stink on the attempts to fix the economy because people like Geithner and Summers don't care, they are in place to protect the fat cats. Get Krugman in there, or someone totally different - just keep Elizabeth Warren, the only honest and above board person there.
JoAnn Weinstein Erfer

Get the word out, fight the FOX machine. Nobody knows what this administration has accomplished so far. It may be too late, but get rid of Geithner. Get rid of all traces of Goldman Sachs. Kick the banks' asses, and you will be loved by dems, republicans and tea baggers.
Laurie Mraz Zwaan

YOUR REVIVAL ADVICE TO OBAMA?

Sat, 27 Nov 2010 21:10:34 -0500

Say you could get a message to the President of the United States. Say you could give him your take on what’s gone wrong - and right - over the last two years.
Say you could give him your advice on how to stage his own Revival.
After two weeks of me talking about Revival, it’s time to hear from you. So email me your thoughts at richard@richardwolffe.com. Or leave your comments below. Or tweet me @richardwolffedc. Or send me a message on Facebook.
I’ll gather the printable ones here on this website. I’ll tweet the best ones as we go along. And I’ll respond to each one of them, either privately or publicly.
All I ask is that you keep your comments polite and respectful so we can share them widely. And that you pass the message on, through Twitter and Facebook, so that we can share these Revival ideas as much as possible.
Over to you!

MEET THE PRESS AND MORE

Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:41:09 -0500

A quick chance to recap some of the interviews I’ve been doing in the last week or so about Revival. These are just a few highlights of the TV interest in the book, its news, themes and how it makes sense of the current political debate.
Meet the Press was lively, not least because I was seated next to the Tea Party-backed, newly-elected Allen West. Having served in the military and having campaigned as a tough advocate of national security, West surprised me with his criticism of the new airport screening policies. And I was astonished that he thought the administration had a “marketing” issue with the screening. As opposed to a national security issue. If this is how Republicans approach terrorism, they are going to abandon what has been their strongest card since 9/11. After all, according to recent polls, more than two thirds of voters support the new scanning and screening.
Here’s part of the Meet the Press round table. Let me know what you think.

This is how the book rollout started on TODAY, with Meredith Vieira, and the thorny question of how the White House - and Congress - deals with the results of the midterm elections.

And here’s my first TV interview about the book, on MSNBC’s Countdown, about the central premise of the book: the revivalist-versus-survivalist split over campaigning, governing, Change, and the presidency.

NUCLEAR REVIVAL

Sat, 20 Nov 2010 22:38:01 -0500

Here’s the incomparable Maureen Dowd columnizing on REVIVAL, Obama, the GOP, nuclear weapons and the Clintons. You can read it all below, or go to the New York Times to read it there. Either way, Maureen nails it again.

Nuking the White House
By MAUREEN DOWD
WASHINGTON
You know you’re in trouble when you need Henry Kissinger to vouch for you.
But there was the one formerly known as “The One” sitting at a table with a bunch of old, white, Republican dudes, choosing the most abstruse issue on the agenda for his moment to Man Up.
With Republicans treating the president like a dirt sandwich and Democrats begging the president to throw a knuckle sandwich, Obama drew his line in the sand on telemetry.
The Start arms treaty used to be a chance for American presidents to stare down the Russians. Now it’s a chance for a Democratic president, albeit belatedly, to stare down the Republicans.
The administration dilly-dallied for months on New Start, which should have been a no-brainer, even after it was clear that Senator Jon Kyl was a problem and needed to be cultivated, and even after it was clear that Republicans were on track to grab some power back.
But faced with the treaty’s unraveling, with possible deleterious consequences for sanctions on Iran and supply lines for our troops in Afghanistan, Obama had no choice. Even if the treaty doesn’t much affect our strategic security, it affects the relationship with Russia and our standing in the world. And resetting the relationship with Russia, with his buddy Dmitri, is the president’s only significant foreign policy accomplishment.
Besides, a man who won the Nobel Peace Prize on layaway doesn’t want to be responsible for any loose Russian nukes ending up in the crazy ’Stans.
As Richard Wolffe notes in his new book, “Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House,” the president drove Rahm Emanuel crazy by spending his first months in office toiling on the details of Start when the chief of staff was trying to get him to focus on the economy and his domestic agenda.
Nuclear arms control, Wolffe writes, was one of Obama’s first interests as a student at Columbia University. And his head is still in those wonky clouds.
“Most people don’t really give a pig’s patootie about a nuclear arms deal with Russia,” James Carville told reporters last week. But he agreed that the president needed to get out of his spineless spiral, even repeating his put-down from the Democratic primaries, that if Hillary gave Barry one of her spheres of testicular fortitude, “they’d both have two.”
Just as Bill Clinton once snatched welfare reform from the Republicans, now President Obama is playing W.’s national security card against the Republicans.
It would have been nice if Obama had made his tough stand earlier, on tax cuts or “don’t ask, don’t tell.” And since he doesn’t have the votes yet, he risks losing and taking a second shellacking. Popeye pulling out the spinach too late.
Still, if the president calls the Republicans’ bluff and makes them vote against ratification, they look petty. Is it worth risking the obliteration of the world to obliterate Obama’s second term?
In The Washington Post recently, Robert Kagan advised his fellow conservatives to show maturity and readiness to govern: “Blocking the treaty will produce three unfortunate results: It will strengthen Vladimir Putin, let the Obama administration off the hook when Russia misbehaves and set up Republicans as the fall guy if and when U.S.-Russian relations go south.”
Senator Richard Lugar, the only Republican so far willing to vote with the president, was blunt in warning Kyl of the danger of playing politics with nukes. His message underscored the hypocrisy of Republicans who shriek at the Iranians building a nuclear bomb while shrugging at the thousands of nukes that the Russians have floating around.
“One of those warheads — and there were 13,300 originally — one of them could demolish my city of Indianapolis,” Lugar told Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC.
The president and his advisers have been moping since the election. Richard Wolffe says the fourth-quarter player in the Oval, who has struggled to figure out whether he’s an insider or an outsider, aims to position himself as a statesman. He wants to come across as the grown-up in the room, disciplining puerile Republicans who would “mess with nuclear weapons and screw up alliances.”
The Republicans may help Obama if they act so vindictive, entitled and puffed up that they turn off the voters who just anointed them.
Sarah Palin’s fans have hijacked what is supposed to be a fun talent contest, “Dancing With the Stars,” and turned it into an annoying straw vote for the Palin family. And on Friday, as Americans were rebelling against groping airport pat-downs, the soon-to-be speaker of the House, who was supposed to travel like real Americans, put himself above the madding crowd.
The Times’s Jeff Zeleny was on the scene and reported that John Boehner did not wait in line or go through security: he “was escorted around the metal detectors and body scanners, and taken directly to the gate.”
So much for Reagan’s trust but verify. Now we’ve got distrust and vilify.

COME AGAIN?

Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:35:14 -0500

Interesting. And curious too. The Washington Post prints a review of REVIVAL which appears to be written by someone who hasn’t read the book.
According to the former Clinton speechwriter Jeff Shesol, there are few revelations in my new book.
This will come as news to The Huffington Post which found plenty of news about Larry Summers, Obama’s chief economic adviser, only yesterday.
It might surprise Mike Allen at Politico, who found enough news to highlight the book’s contents in Playbook two days in a row. And to David Jackson at USA Today, who followed Mike on the Obama diaries.
Then there are my friends at The Daily Beast, who picked no less than 10 juicy revelations today, with no help from yours truly.
Just today there’s Greg Sargent at, um, the Washington Post’s Plum Line blog, who finds some great insight into Rahm’s approach to bipartisanship.
None of these people are exactly pushovers when it comes to news judgment. Nor in fact are the swarming “bloggers” whom Shesol dismisses so breezily. “The fruits of his access aside,” Shesol writes, “the bulk of Wolffe’s book seems cobbled together from press reports.” That’s after he cites fresh insight about Obama’s reading habits and Pelosi’s temper, drawn from, yes, Revival. If only the job of writing a news-breaking book were as easy as cobbling together press reports.
Shesol thinks that writing about the Stupak amendment and its undoing is dull.
Hey Jeff: so do I! That’s why it amounts to all of one paragraph on half a page of a 300-page book. Did you bother reading it? That’s the whole book, not just the last line, which you manage to misquote by inserting capital letters for some bizarre reason.
Shesol says the book seems uncertain of its premise. Which is also strange, since he never once mentions the central premise of the book: the deep split between the Revivalists and the Survivalists. That’s what the book title refers to. Not the midterm elections and its aftermath.
I can’t help but wonder if Shesol’s complete failure to review the central premise is the result of his close ties to the Clintonistas who are part of the Survivalist crowd.
Or whether he simply lost the plot because he skimmed the entire book.

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS

Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:20:25 -0500

REVIVAL is out tomorrow, but here are some sneak peeks at The Daily Beast, The Huffington Post and once again Politico.
First, The Daily Beast digs into the relationship between Obama and Clinton, as well as the fraught feelings between their staffers.
Second, The Huffington Post goes big on Larry Summers, Obama’s chief economic adviser, and his dysfunctional relationship with the rest of the economic team inside the West Wing.
And finally Mike Allen likes the scoop about the President’s personal diaries:
THE OBAMA DIARIES - From Richard Wolffe's "Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House," out tomorrow: "There was often speculation that a writer like Obama would keep extensive journals of his own unlikely journey from the Illinois state senate to the presidency. ... But the speculation was never confirmed, and Obama's aides appeared to know little about what their boss was writing, if anything." Obama told Richard in the Oval Office, up on being asked about a Lincoln quote (which turned out to be from Reagan) he had used in remarks to House Democrats: "Sometimes, I keep notes, I keep a diary, and I was looking over some old volumes that I had written." Richard continues: "No doubt such diary entries would form the basis of a future autobiography, just as his Chicago journals were the foundation for his memoir, 'Dreams from My Father.' But they also suggested something about Obama's self-reflective moments. They were the result of a methodical harvesting of other people's ideas and words: a conscious effort to weave his own thoughts and experiences into some kind of literary compendium. They also served to reinforce his self-image, as a self-disciplined, strategic mind that could find solutions to emotional challenges." (p. 146) $17.16 on Amazon http://amzn.to/cDkbGR

T MINUS TWO

Sun, 14 Nov 2010 22:40:18 -0500

REVIVAL is out on Tuesday, but details are already starting to leak. Here’s the first take from Mike Allen at Politico:
FIRST LOOK - Richard Wolffe's "Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House" - out Tuesday -- $17.16 on Amazon http://amzn.to/cDkbGR -- Among the juicy bits from Richard's all-access semester in the West Wing ("based on my contemporaneous notes of White House events from January to March 2010"):   --"How and why Obama grew detached from Change - even as he was enacting big changes - is one of the stories at the heart of this White House." (p. 7)   --"[O]ther senior staffers believed that [former Chief of Staff Rahm] Emanuel's excess energy was a major part of the problem ... In place of the rigid discipline of the presidential campaign, instead of their no-drama style and the strategic focus, ideas ricocheted around the West Wing with each firing of Emanuel's synapses. 'It's all tactics and no strategy,' said one of Emanuel's close colleagues. 'That's something the president feels very strongly he's missing. How do I get from here to where I want to go? It's all tactical and it's all Rahm. He has no follow-through and no management. Nobody is there to check that what was decided in the seven-thirty meeting actually happens. The problem with Rahm is that, yes, he's brilliant. But he is purely tactical, and he changes his mind based on a conversation he just had with Paul Begala. There are many times when Axe has to shout him down to drop an idea or a tactic. And his style is unbelievably bad. It's just too abusive." (p. 55-6)
--"The Revivalists were campaign loyalists who believed in the transformational spirit of Change. They nurtured a sense of mission ... The Survivalists were political insiders who measured Change in the smaller increments of the here and now. They saw themselves as scrappy realists ... Obama himself straddled both groups, leaving the questions about his character and purpose unresolved." (p. 94-5)   --"The Survivalists were represented by Emanuel, senior adviser Pete Rouse, deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, and congressional liaison Phil Schiliro. And the Revivalists were represented by Axelrod, senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, press secretary Robert Gibbs, former campaign manager David Plouffe, and two communications directors, Anita Dunn and Dan Pfeiffer." (p. 116)   --Larry "Summers was a Survivalist, and his opposition often lay among the Revivalists at the Council of Economic Advisers: [Christina] Romer, as well as Obama's campaign economist Austan Goolsbee, a young University of Chicago economics professor." (p. 176)   --"Emanuel was the master of the system, not the man to change it." (p. 99)   --"Everyone knew the communications effort was struggling, including Dunn and her successor, Dan Pfeiffer, who had spent several weeks reviewing their operations. He wrote his critique in a seven-page memo and delivered a forty-five minute version of his conclusions to the team in the Roosevelt Room. Pfeiffer believed the Cabinet was underused in 2009. They had failed to coordinate their message with Democrats in Congress and Democratic pundits on cable and in print. Rapid response and planning were both in trouble. Above all, they needed to be more strategic in using the president's time. They relied too much on him to deliver the message.   "Obama agreed. He was out there all by himself. There were a few cabinet officials out there, but most were hardly seen or heard. The other side was running a campaign against them, but they weren't running a campaign back. It was all defense and no offense. And they needed to accomplish what he had always set out to do as a community organizer, as a writer, and as a presidential candidate: to tell a story. 'We did a lot of good things last year, but we could be a lot tighter in how we operate," said Obama. To the campaign veterans, the flashbacks to Ohio and Texas were vivid: They were repeating many of the same mistakes they had made as they tried to close out the primaries early in March 2008. They had grown conventional in their politics and message, forgetting their identity as outsiders in their desperation to win." (p. 109)   --"Source Notes": "This volume draws heavily on exclusive interviews with several dozen White House officials, congressional staffers, administration officials, and Obama advisers and friends, using a variety of ground rules: on the record, on background, and off the record. ... Exclusive comments from President Obama include several drawn from interviews during the presidential election, as well as two Oval Office sessions, one of which was dedicated to the subject of this book, on April 22, 2010. My interview with Vice President Biden was held in his West Wing office on July 21, 2010." (p. 295)

THE MEANING OF LIFE

Sun, 7 Nov 2010 16:53:36 -0500

A few of my takes on last week’s tidal wave of a landslide of a mixed verdict in a divided Washington:
Here’s what I wrote for the Independent in London, about how the Tea Party managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of Republican victory. And how Barack Obama still does not fit into the template that is known as the Clinton presidency.
And here’s my before and after for Channel 4 News in London too (who knew there would be so much interest in the midterm congressional elections overseas?).
Last, but by no means least, here’s my take for the Daily Beast on the finger-pointing at one former Chief of Staff and House Democratic strategist, who decided to run for office while his party was running for the hills.
REVIVAL is out in little more than a week, so stay tuned for more of why and how of the last couple of years.

MIXED MESSAGES

Mon, 1 Nov 2010 16:00:35 -0400

Before we get into the tidal wave of a landslide tomorrow, here are a few choice numbers from last week’s New York Times/CBS News poll. They suggest the voters’ positions are not quite so clear as the expected results in the midterms.
Likely voters favor Republicans over Democrats by six points. But when asked whether they have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Republicans, 41 per cent say favorable. A similar question about Democrats gives them a 46 per cent favorable rating. So Republicans trail Democrats in approval ratings, but lead them as a matter of voting choice.
Voters are not pulling the lever for or against Obama; 42 per cent say it has nothing to do with him. In fact, 56 per cent say they feel optimistic about the next two years with Obama as president. They are also not voting to put the GOP in power or kick Democrats out of power; 43 per cent say there’s another reason for their voting choice.
On the biggest issue - the economy - 51 per cent say the economy is where they expected it to be at this point of Obama’s presidency. Fully 68 per cent think the downtown is temporary. And the two biggest sources of blame for the poor economy are the Bush administration and Wall Street. Yet a majority also doesn’t think Obama has a clear plan to create jobs.
Confused? You will be.

DEPARTMENT OF DRAPE-MEASURING

Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:12:01 -0400

There’s a lot of post-game analysis about the mid-term elections before the game has really begun. Including plenty of dancing in the end zone by Republican operatives, and lots of finger-pointing by Democrats.
Great. But let’s hold on just a week before we decide who really won and lost and why.
So in that spirit, here’s my latest at the Daily Beast, looking at how Obama’s aides view these final days of the 2010 cycle, and what factors can tip the results one way or another in the next week. Plus the story gets into their agenda post-election, which is really more important than trying to predict who will lose their job on November 2nd.
In the meantime, I’m beginning to wonder if some Republican commentators have any sense of self-awareness. Never mind that Marc Thiessen worked for some of the most go-it-alone, hubristic Republicans in recent times: among them, George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Jesse Helms. Apparently the real fault of Barack Obama is that he’s a go-it-alone, hubristic politician. And what’s his punishment for thinking that voters supported his agenda in 2008? That Republicans will try to impose their voter-backed mandate in 2010.
You know what that’s called? Democracy.
Obama had every reason to believe that voters actually supported what he was offering in 2008. If the GOP wins big now, they’ll have every reason to think the same. But you can’t suggest that Obama was deluded or arrogant for drawing a clear conclusion from the clear election in 2008.
Because democracy works for both parties. Right?

LEADING THE CHARGE

Thu, 14 Oct 2010 06:06:46 -0400

There’s a reason why the punditocracy is skeptical about the White House charge about foreign money buying the mid-term elections. Not because it isn’t possible. (Think Progress just found the US Chamber of Commerce took in almost $1 million in foreign cash.) And not because everyone is happy with undisclosed donors spending millions on races across the country.
But because it looks like the Democrats are playing the refs in a game where the refs don’t carry a whistle. Even clear breaches of campaign finance laws only tend to get fixed after voters have pulled the lever. At a time of pressing needs in the economy and among Democratic candidates, the debate seems too little, too late.
Having said that, the people who care passionately about campaign finance breaches and anonymous donors are the Democratic base and independent voters who dislike both parties. So this isn’t entirely misguided as a strategy, as I explain here at the Daily Beast. A fractional change in Democratic turnout could mean the difference between a Republican majority of a few seats, or one well into the double digits.
Right now, Democrats seem to be edging closer in several Senate races, making it increasingly improbable that they will lose control there. The New York Times’s Nate Silver has a good overview of those trends. Without Washington state, the GOP can’t really make it to a majority in the Senate. Especially with West Virginia showing some improvement for Joe Manchin.
But there are three weeks to go. Plenty can change.

CHANGES AT 1600

Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:26:29 -0400

The big changes at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue continue. After Rahm Emanuel’s departure as chief of staff, and Pete Rouse’s rise to take his place, there comes this from the New York Times: National security adviser James Jones is heading out too.
His replacement: Tom Donilon, whom I profiled recently for The Daily Beast when his name was being rumored for the chief of staff job.
What does it all mean? Jones never fit in and never really tried to do so. He was a close friend of John McCain and felt he could make a difference by serving the country and new president. Donilon was also not part of the Obama campaign team; he’s a Biden guy. But he’s a long-time Democratic operative who has prepped presidential nominees in debates for the last several election cycles. And his work ethic is above and beyond anything Jones displayed.
One last factor to reckon with: Bob Woodward. Jones opened his mouth to his old friend and was clearly unhappy with Donilon. Such indiscretion is unusual for a retired Marine general and distinctly unwelcome inside Obama’s inner circle.

IN THE BEGINNING

Thu, 7 Oct 2010 13:53:56 -0400

Many thanks to Mike Allen at Politico for breaking news of the title and cover of my new book this morning. Here’s how he wrote it up:
FIRST LOOK: Richard Wolffe’s new book will be called “REVIVAL: The Struggle for Survival Inside the White House,” and will be out Nov. 16. Crown Publishers, an imprint of the Crown Publishing Group at Random House, will announce today: “Over the span of an extraordinary two months in the life of a young presidency, Wolffe tells the incredible story of how Obama and his senior aides engaged in a desperate struggle for survival that stands as the measure of who they are and how they govern. … Starting at the first anniversary of the inauguration, REVIVAL is a portrait of a White House at work under exceptional strain across a sweeping set of challenges: from health care reform to a struggling economy, from two wars to terrorism. … REVIVAL will have a first printing of 100,000 copies.” $17.16 on Amazon http://amzn.to/aqr76W Enlarged jacket image http://amzn.to/cGSevE

ROCK AND ROLL

Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:35:23 -0400

Um, if his campaign had tried to get all those lazy young voters out like this in 2008, we’d still be talking about Senator Barack Obama. The White House is calling it a Youth Town Hall, and it’s airing on MTV, BET and CMT on October 14. Something tells me the kids are going to need more than an hour of tweeted questions to go vote for candidates whose names they don’t know.
You can’t blame the White House for trying. And I’m sure there’s plenty going on besides youth TV and the odd Rolling Stone interview. But I don’t see the sustained effort that carried new voters and infrequent voters to the polls two years ago. It’s always hard in a midterm year to reach those voters. But that’s all the more reason to sustain the effort.
David Plouffe likes to say that the 2008 election would have been a 50/50 result if the electorate looked like it did in 2004. Instead, they changed the make-up of the voters and won by a huge six-point margin.
What happens when the electorate looks like it always does in these elections? My guess is an unhappy result for Democrats, who will only have themselves to blame for staying at home.