What matters is your deep knowledge and clear insight.  Thank you for being a clear leader!

Obama is growin more and more unpopular indeed... the thing is the GOP isn't gaining all that much... We are goin to see a major Independent movement before long, I think that's growing more apparent.

I've said 50 seats lost for a while now as a guess. Could be less, or more, will have to wait till post labor day to firm it up.

One of Jerome's points, above, is that the Democrats need to reach out to the 21% of teabaggers who identify as independents or soft liberals instead of attacking them.

I always applaud thinking outside the box, even if it is way, way, way outside the box here. So I must applaud his thinking... even if it is logically riddled with holes.

There is no indication that those 21% of teabaggers ever cast a vote for a democrat in recent times. Chances are, they are working class whites, who left the part long ago and should be the focus of Democrats no more.

And therein lies the problem: you have a depressed economy, and people are angry, even though Barack Obama shouldn't be the legitimate recipient of that anger. So who do you court?

Jerome says go after the white working class voters, that 21% of teabaggers he's talking about. Those people won't come to Obama. He would have to go to them, and leave behind any last vestiges of being a democrat. And even then, I doubt these people would approve of him. There is, after all, one thing Obama can't change. I strongly believe that non-college educated working class whites are a demographic best left forgotten by the democrats. They're more trouble than they're worth.

Your argument is more meritorious, that an energized base will carry democrats through the midterms, as the base has always done in midterms. And by engaging in incrementalism, Obama has alienated an impatient base. The problem is, change has always (always) been incremental. Reading the history of FDR is very useful (see especially social security). And progressives have always been impatient (see same history). Historically, there is nothing unprecedented in the incremental nature of Obama's legislation, only the scope. The legislative victories are huge when seen with a historical perspective, but I don't expect the other half of progressives to all of a sudden realize that. They're too busy focusing upon the hole, not the donut. But I agree a more partisan Obama might be helpful.

No. I think re-election matters more to Obama than anyone can imagine. He was already mentioning it in his '08 victory speech.

...my poll numbers are great!

Of course, I don't have the responsibility of governing; making the hard decisions to drag those numbers down. And neither does she!

On November 12, 1938, FDRs disapproval reached a record high of 46% in Gallup as people became frustrated with the pace of recovery from the Great Depression. Yesterday, Barack Obama's disapproval rating tied for the third straight day at its highest level at... 46% in gallup.

To suggest that these numbers are cause for resignation in this climate is just plain pumatarded.

Was gonna get into it but the post was already long. Kinda late for a base strategy given that relies on policy from the party in power.

Obama is using '10 as a test lab for '12. For example, immigration, its not going anywhere, but they are driving a wedge on it while registering/GOTV operations for Latino's to see if they 1) can generate new voters, and 2) can do it on issue that doesn't piss off other needed block (somewhat) white independent and suburb voters enugh that they pull a R lever. The whole DNC '10 operation, about $50M worth, is designed to see what works and what doesn't, for '12. Of course, that was what '09 was for-- obviously some of the crew were asleep at the wheel.

The Obama team knows they can't replicate '08, so are going for a more 'base' strategy of more latinos. Its full of guesses and assumptions, but in this environment, its all they got.

You are right the messaging of the Obama team has been an unmitigated disaster. I mean where to begin, he has no attack dog, the BP is so gaffe-tastic that hardly anyone takes him seriously. Then you have the political team that pushed bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship, diluting every bill, making every backroom deal possible, selling out on every progressive principle to alienate the base just so that Obama can appear above the fray. What happened? The Republicans pounded him, in foreign policy the Israelis pounded him, he lost his base, he lost all the goodwill in the middle east, leaving him in the midst of a chaotic situation where he has to explain how great his reform is.

If Obama thought that he could come to Washington and wave a magic wand and heal the partisanship he was proven wrong and very brutally so. Instead he pursued that same deluded bipartisanship for nearly 2 years now to no avail. Now his "mayberry machiavellis" (h/t HuffPo) have embraced the far-right economic agenda because they frankly lost the messaging battle. So we have an incompetent core group of advisers in Jarrett, Axelrod, Gibbs,Summers and Emmanuel, doubling down with some equally incompetent cabinet members like Geithner and Salazar. Now we can sit back and watch all our campaigning in 2008 be flushed down the commode. The only impetus that they are using to "motivate" the base now is fear. Cue Tom Tomorrow.

The image that looked like it would post, didn't. The poll example is at the krugman link.

If you have to talk about poll driven policy at least have the honesty to cite Krugman this week, where he bemoans this administration's embracement of far-right economic policy based on polls.

My chief criticism of the diary is that the fundamental assertion is schizophrenic. Jerome is assembling a pastiche of data to justify the conclusion aforethought that Obama is too liberal.

Jerome argues that Obama needs to go to the middle to win over the independents.

 

And the kicker: Many of the Independents or soft Democrats that Democratic candidates most need to win, identify themselves with the Tea Party... among the 54% of Democrats and Independents among the wider population polled by Gallup, 39% of that total  are Tea Party supporters. Democrats have no chance at all of winning those 39% of different type of Democratic voters and pure Independents? We might as well give up! Actually, its the only chance they have at winning.

Obama is too polarizing too. Yet the chief concern for the midterms is base turnout.