On Tuesday night, President Obama addressed the nation from the Oval Office for the second time in his presidency. In his first year, the President was criticized for overexposing himself, but he has, to his credit, treated the Resolute Desk as a commodity to be used sparingly and only to impart gravity.
Last night’s speech was probably a net positive for the President. The cessation of combat operations in Iraq has been greeted positively by most Americans. Caveats about the remaining 50,000 advisors and the renaming of combat units are understood, and few expect hostilities to terminate simply because the American government declared the operation over. Nevertheless, Americans are war-weary and welcome the, albeit arbitrary, milestone that is the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
It was expected that the President would acknowledge the increasingly costly combat operations in Afghanistan and ask for patience in that ongoing war. There was speculation among the commentary class that the President may even recognize President Bush’s successful efforts in Iraq. While it would partially invalidate the White House’s midterm theme that the Bush Presidency is to blame for many, if not all, the problems that Obama currently faces on the domestic front, it would be impossible to promote a surge strategy in Afghanistan without at least acknowledging the success of the Iraqi surge. Obama’s reference to former President Bush was perfectly post-partisan.
With that nod towards Republicans and GOP-leaning independents, the speech sounded like an American President addressing a united nation. It was well received, that is, until the speech turned gratuitously toward the President’s domestic priorities.
In praising the U.S. troops that have served abroad, the President correctly observed that “they have met every test they faced.” Agreed. “Now, it is our turn.” Oh boy…
“To strengthen our middle class, we must give all our children the education they deserve, and all our workers the skills that they need to compete in a global economy. We must jumpstart industries that create jobs, and end our dependence on foreign oil.”
It was brief, perhaps sixty seconds long in an 18 minute speech, but it was enough to completely derail the President’s stated theme. The end of combat operations in Iraq has a human calculation as well as a political one, and that should not be forgotten. However, in political terms, the end of the combat phase of the Iraq war has been a welcome reprieve from the Administration’s domestic initiatives that the public has, for months, been vocally rejecting.
Since the last combat brigade left Iraq on August 19th, 2010, the national conversation has turned away from the endless drumbeat of domestic reform and economic calamity towards foreign affairs. A Gallup poll, released on August 11th, found that the President got the highest marks on terrorism and foreign affairs, as well as education and energy policy, and both were trending upwards from the previous month. The President’s daily tracking polls have reflected the nation’s positive feelings about the withdrawal of combat troops. Both Gallup and Rasmussen Reports have shown the President’s approval numbers moving in a positive direction since the end of combat operations in Iraq. Overnight, the narrative shifted from the 70/30 issues that the President fumbled (Arizona’s immigration law and subsequent Department of Justice lawsuit, the Ground Zero mosque, etc.) to an issue that the President has been able to manage effectively since the campaign. By bringing the economy back into the speech, an issue on which the August 11th Gallup poll showed President maintains a 59 percent disapproval rating, he scuttled the mission of that speech.
The “Turn the Page” speech may accentuate an approval bounce that has been in progress for two weeks, but it will be short lived. The President’s speech not only signaled the end of combat operations in Iraq, but the end of the White House’s focus on that issue, if there was focus there to begin with. The President’s priorities are domestic, the remaking of the country’s foundational insitutions (the “green economy,” healthcare and insurance industry reform, expansion of public sector initiatives). He reminds the country of that priority at every opportunity, appropriate or otherwise, and that is what turns off the independent voters that indicate they will vote against the Democratic Party’s generic candidate. While some may argue that domestic issues are the average American’s priority now, and should be the focus of this President, it is hard to argue that his solutions are being well received. If this was an attempt to change the subject, it was mismanaged.
The President sees his mission of dramatic reform as bold and courageous; the swing voter sees it as hubristic and dismissive of the country’s history and propositional origins. First among those is the Federal Government’s default position of deference in most social or domestic issues. Tuesday night was an opportunity to change the subject to one that Obama manages well and on which the country, generally, approves. Why he and his speechwriters could not help themselves but remind the country of the President’s domestic priorities again is anyone’s guess.
The President’s poll bounce, if there is one, will likely dissipate quickly; the mandate of 2008 regarding the War on Terrorism and its resulting ground wars simply escapes this administration. For them, their mission is entirely domestic, and foreing policy is synonymous with diplomatic policy. Their opposition to the Iraq war prior to 2009 seems more than ever to have simply been a vehicle to achieve electoral success. For the rest of us, while the economy is the top priority, foreign policy still matters.
The public wants so badly to like this President; the nation is weary of the years spent mistrusting the motives of their elected officials. The President had a chance to reclaim that trust Tuesday night. Sadly, he did not take advantage of it.
Noah Rothman is the online editor at C&E. Email him at nrothman@campaignsandelections.com