Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CQ: Obama's Winning Streak On Hill Unprecedented

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 11:36 AM
Original message
CQ: Obama's Winning Streak On Hill Unprecedented
A bit of statistical reality for the people who think that Obama isn't getting anything done, or that he should magically be winning more than he is.

***

In his first year in office, President Obama did better even than legendary arm-twister Lyndon Johnson in winning congressional votes on issues where he took a position, a Congressional Quarterly study finds.

The new CQ study gives Obama a higher mark than any other president since it began scoring presidential success rates in Congress more than five decades ago. And that was in a year where Obama tackled how to deal with Afghanistan, Iraq, an expanding terrorist threat, the economic crisis and battles over health care.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122436116
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
1. Key words "on issues where he took a position" Didn't he take a position of renegotiation NAFTA? DAD...
What was his position on Mandates?
What was his position on lobbyists controlling our government?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoJoWorkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Sorry, but the same wording was used for the other Presidents as well, according to Rachel
Get over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I will get over it when I see the man LEAD. I do not count much success in winning battles that are
never even fought. If Obama keeps on waiting till the outcome is certain before "expressing a position" he is as useless as tits on a boar hog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. That's the point, though. The others had a lower success rate because they took positions on issues
that weren't slam dunks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
2. "on issues where he took a position"
When you form your position on consensus opinion, then you probably will have a strong success rate. I think a lot of people are upset first by some of the positions he took, and second by many he didn't bother with.

Even the article points out that he mostly took positions on battles he knew were already won. "But Sarah Binder, a congressional analyst at the Brookings Institution, says there's another key reason he scored so well. She says he only took an official position on issues that were really important to him — those that he knew he had a very good chance of winning. He picked his battles carefully."

Where are his bold battles that required sacrificing Congressional seats and political allies? Where has he stuck his neck out? The battles he's won would have been won by any Democrat in the White House. Where are the wins that took courage?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Right, because it's not like the Republicans have been fighting him or anything.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. You'd do it for Randolph Scott.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
6. whoop-de-fuckin-doo
yay team
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-13-10 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC