SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home A Political Upside for Obama on the Islamic Center?

JONATHAN CHAIT AUGUST 19, 2010

A Political Upside for Obama on the Islamic Center?

BY NOAM SCHEIBER

[Guest post by Noam Scheiber:]

I largely agree with Chait's take on the Park51 controversy--in speaking out for the right to build the mosque, I think Obama was being presidential in the best sense of the word. Which is to say, taking a principled position despite the political fallout or any parochial concerns. But I think Chait may have been too pessimistic about the short-term political consequences.

That's not just because, as Nate Silver has pointed out, public opinion actually backs the right to build the mosque/Islamic center near Ground Zero. (A majority thinks it's inappropriate, but that's not the same as denying the right Obama was defending.)

It's because, if you consider Obama's most pressing short-term political problem, it's not the middle of the political spectrum (though that's a problem, too). It's his base. As numerous people have pointed out, the Democratic base is far less energized than the GOP base heading into the midterm elections, when low turnout overall tends to make that kind of energy hugely important.

By speaking out on behalf of the Park51 project, Obama may have reminded his base why they fell in love with him in the first place, and made it a bit more likely that they turn out in the fall. All the more so given that his comments invited a massive conservative backlash--which could inspire a sense of grievance on the left and lead to a counter-backlash.

Now, as Neera Tanden pointed out in her TNR column on Saturday, which was the first place I saw someone think through the effects of the statement on the base, it's not clear this is going to happen. And let me just reiterate that I don't think Obama waded into the controversy as a way to motivate his base. (There are far, far less risky ways to do that.) But I do think it's possible that this will be one of the practical, if marginal effects. And when you're talking about several dozen congressional seats in a midterm election, the margins can matter quite a bit.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 8 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

8 comments

I doubt that this issue will resonate much on November 2nd. I am skeptical that President Obama's remarks will motivate the Democratic base that much. It was a very measured statement, as one would anticipate from a law professor. And of course, I mean nothing invidious by citing the president's previous profession, the way legions of rightists do when they refer to Obama's legal background.

- liberal reformer

August 19, 2010 at 1:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

lib ref is correct on all counts. Obama's comments were measured, not designed to show himself as a really strong leader, but don't really reinforce his image as a weak leader with incoherent Blue Diog policies or political positions.

- drofnats1

August 19, 2010 at 1:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Agreed with Lib Ref and Drofnats (how's that for a global harmonic convergence)! Obama's first statement from last Friday night, if it stood on its own, may have been enough to get the liberal base motivated. But his Saturday clarification of that position, which created the (perhaps mistaken) impression that he was waffling on the issue, pulled it right back out of the left's embrace. I suppose there could be some upside if the issue continues to flare beyond Labor Day and Obama decides to make some kind of forceful, public and on-the-record defense of the First Amendment. Otherwise, I think it will take something like the nomination of Elizabeth Warren to be the head of the CFPA, and maybe some soaring words after mayhem breaks out on the Mall during the August 28 Glenn Beck-fest (I kid), to really make liberals get excited again.

- wildboy

August 19, 2010 at 2:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

wildboy.Ii think it's going to take more than words to re-ignite the base. the Base's theme song re Obama is Eliza's pop aria from My Fair Lady: Don't Talk of Love-- Show Me. Obama has repeatedly reinforced the meme that he is a weak leader who does not really support Progressive policies. For example, General Petraeus seems to be in charge rather than our Commander-in-chief [or is it Compromiser-in-Chief??]. During the Gulf oil spill disaster, BP was oviously in charge, despite Obama's occasional claims to the contrary. When he wasn't claiming that BP was in charge. During the health-care reform debate, the insurance companies prevailed. And the banks asserted their power to water down and weaken the final financial reform legislation, a victory for Wall St. over Main St. For the stimulus, Obama advocated a package that many of his own advisors knew was inadequate both in total amount and in containing many tax cuts and other items that were of little value for creating jobs. In summary, Obama has far-too-often abandoned the role of presidential leader in favor of being a conciliator or centrist – too often synonymous with mediocre. To paraphrase Molly Ivins (rest her soul), what you find in the center of the road are yellow stripes and dead armadillos, possums, and rabbits.

- drofnats1

August 19, 2010 at 2:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So, drofnats, does that mean you will get off the couch and contribute money and vote in the midterms if BHO nominates Elizabeth Warren? Or does he need to pull out troops from Afghanistan before you and the rest of the lefty masses start to stir again? Methinks you're secretly hoping the reality of Speaker Boehner teaches all Americans a lesson -- the kind they presumably never learned from Speaker Gingrich and, later, President GW Bush. Or am I being unfair?

- wildboy

August 19, 2010 at 4:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Harmonic convergence indeed!

- liberal reformer

August 19, 2010 at 6:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"During the Gulf oil spill disaster, BP was oviously in charge, despite Obama's occasional claims to the contrary." Yeah, drofnats. Thad Allen must be a potted plant. That good ole Texas gal, Molly Ivins, would've wanted more than was achieved in the health-care and financial reforms, no doubt. But she certainly wouldn't have blown up the party for that. If anyone remembered, she was not enamored of Al Gore, but she was also the harshest critic of those Dems that couldn't tell the difference between him and W. Though she was defiantly not middle-of-the-roader, she had the political smarts not to have a death wish.

- scrubby

August 19, 2010 at 8:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thanks scrubby. Molly Ivins may not be resting in peace with the State of Denial we now have on both sides of the extremes. Even if Obama could energize his base, it is not big enough to make a difference, and certainly not geographically dispersed to the most competitive House contests. He cut off anyone over 50 before the 2008 election. In four months in 2008, Obama converted me from progressive Democrat to skeptical Independent, just with his pre-election economic positions. Get used to the idea that half the voters in 2010 are going to be voting in protest, and to end ONE-PARTY-RULE, hopefully for another generation. It did not work for the GOP and it does not work for the Dems.

- K2K

August 19, 2010 at 9:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close