Official White House Photo
President Obama shares a drink with Joe Biden, John Boehner, John Kasich after playing a round of golf in June 2011.
Ron Fournier has some advice for President Obama: to have a "great presidency," he's going to have to get better at "schmoozing."
For Obama, learning how to schmooze could mean the difference between a good and great presidency. Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton (to name just a few) were masters at building relationships that furthered their political aims. They dined and drank with lawmakers, and they ventured to Capitol Hill out of respect. Johnson was an aggressive phone-caller. Roosevelt mixed cocktails for guests. Clinton flattered House Speaker Newt Gingrich. [...]
At the start of his second term, one wonders less about Obama's fitness than his willingness: Why doesn't he do more to build and maintain the relationships required to govern in era of polarization?
If this advice sounds familiar, it's because Fournier is on well-trodden ground -- Jon Meacham, David Brooks, and Bob Woodward have all urged Obama to celebrate the efficacy of schmoozing. Even New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) has advised, "The president's got to start inviting people over for dinner. He's got to play golf with them. He has to pick up the phone and call and say, 'I know we disagree on this, but I just want to say -- I heard it was your wife's birthday or your kid just got into college.' He has to go build friendships."
What I find troubling about this advice isn't the repetition, but rather, the partisan realities that make the suggestion useless.
At a certain level, I can appreciate why the media establishment finds the guidance compelling -- Fournier, Meacham, Brooks, Woodward, et al, have been around Washington long enough to have seen plenty of presidents in both parties find success by cultivating personal relationships with would-be rivals. Under the norms of American politics, this model makes sense. I'll gladly concede there have been times at which lawmakers were on the fence before a big vote, and a president could gently apply pressure with a White House dinner invitation and an after-meal chat on the Truman balcony.
But the advice is predicated on a faulty assumption: that one of the major parties hasn't been radicalized and that the old rules still apply.
We've discussed this before, but since the argument is still kicking around, let's recap why schmoozing isn't the solution.
First, let's note that Obama has invested some effort in this. The president has used events like the Super Bowl and March Madness to invite bipartisan groups of lawmakers over to hang out, hoping to develop a rapport. In May 2011, Obama invited a bipartisan group to the White House, not for a meeting or policy negotiations, but as part of "a get-to-know-you effort in the spirit of bipartisanship and collegiality." Republicans accepted the invitation -- and soon after launched the debt-ceiling crisis, threatening to hurt the nation on purpose unless Obama met non-negotiable demands.
So much for schmoozing.
And why doesn't interpersonal outreach work? I suspect it's because Republicans have reached an ideological extreme unseen in modern American history. It's a quantifiable observation, not a subjective one. Even if GOP policymakers were inclined to work with Obama, they realize that they'd be punished soon after by a primary challenge -- and they know this to be true because it's happened more than a few times in recent years (look up names like Crist, Specter, Bennett, Lugar, etc.).
Let's return to the thesis presented earlier this year by Tom Mann and Norm Ornstein: "[W]e have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party."
The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.
When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country's challenges.
"Both sides do it" or "There is plenty of blame to go around" are the traditional refuges for an American news media intent on proving its lack of bias, while political scientists prefer generality and neutrality when discussing partisan polarization. Many self-styled bipartisan groups, in their search for common ground, propose solutions that move both sides to the center, a strategy that is simply untenable when one side is so far out of reach.
This morning, Fournier argued, in defense of his thesis, that "every president" has had to deal with "extremists." That's true. But every president hasn't had to deal with an entire political party that, statistically speaking, is the most ideologically extreme since the dawn of the modern American party system.
What's more, note how this extremism manifests itself in practical terms. John Boehner has declared in recent years, "This is not a time for compromise," and "I reject the word" compromise. Mitch McConnell has said several times that defeating President Obama, not helping Americans, his top "priority," and that he deliberately refused to consider bipartisan proposals, even ones that he liked and approved of, in order to advance his larger partisan cause.
For his part, Obama has frequently adopted GOP measures as his own, in the hopes of advancing bipartisanship, only to find Republicans opposing their own proposals. Indeed, just this week, the president nominated a Republican for a top post in his cabinet, and the fiercest opposition is coming from -- you guessed it -- the GOP.
This isn't the kind of problem that can be remedied with backslapping and friendly chats.
As I've argued before, the notion that schmoozing will lead to progress rests upon the assumption that congressional Republicans are responsible officials, willing to negotiate and work in good faith, and prepared to find common ground with Obama. All they need is some face-time and presidential hand-holding. Once they can get along on a personal level, a constructive process will follow.
It's a pleasant enough fantasy, and I wish it were true, but everything we've seen over the last four years points to the limits of schmoozing. GOP leaders respond to unyielding primary voters, Fox News, and Rush Limbaugh, not interpersonal outreach from a president they've tried to undermine at every turn.
Leave a Comment:
Totally agreed. Schmoozing does only work, like negotiation and compromise, when there is a willing partner on the other end; one who is open to opportunity and change.
The current Republican party, from the mainstream leadership to the corporate run Teapers, has closed that door, nailed it shut, and stacked the furniture against it- then blame Obama for not knocking.
That game has started to wear mighty thin among Americans, who would rather see a compromise and things done rather than bitter partisanism and nothing getting done. It is the MSM who is 'in the tank' for continued battling.
Totally on the mark Fugudaddy.
Blaming the MSM is a cop out. Sure- perpetual crisis is highly profitable for 24/7 news. Simply because there is a profit interest there- simply because they are feeding in that ecosystem does not make them the initiator, or even a casual factor.
Obama said in his Univision town hall in September that the "most important" lesson he learned during his first term in the White House is that "you can't change Washington from the inside".
Swell. So why has his Organizing for America organization been demobilized?
This is a repeat of 2008 when the organizers were told, "Thank you for making the campaign a labor of love. Gotta go now though, really busy- I'll call you real soon. There is some milk in the fridge- be sure to lock the door on the way out."
How about some schmoozing with the ones that gave you some love. How about a little love in return?
Glad you enjoy living in lala land, but fantasy is not truth. Take your blinders off.
This retort is generic, and can be applied to any subject by a speaker holding any point of view.
Surely someone who refers to themselves as a chemist has sufficient mental muscle to respond with something more substantive and adult than a college dorm version of "neener".
No amount of "Schmoozing" will do any good with these people. They are deathly afraid of being challenged for showing any kind of weakness. The GOP has created an insane monster that they can't control and their only chance of surviving is go along with it.
I said it yesterday this is Smart vs. Stupid and the representatives that pandered to the lowest common denominator are now helplessly being dragged behind it no matter how destructive or crazy it gets.
I do think that the only genuine hope for the Republican party is that eventually more moderate Republicans who are not from the South will break off and form if not their own party at least their own faction, much like the Blue Dogs in the past.
Helpless and Hopeless had a race . When Helpless fell down , Hopeless tied the race .
Yeah Fournier - schmoozing with the dudes who think it a good idea to shut down the government! Feel good topics galore to explore on the tenth hole!
Meanwhile, why haven't Ornstein and Mann been invited to schmooze it up lately, Fournier? Theirs is an analysis of today's political landscape, Republican land mines, snipers, and howitzers included!
Until the Republican party ostracizes its crazies, and takes them out of our political formula, schmoozing will remain the strategy of fools! -Kevo
It couldn't be because he is ahhhh...black?
Obama invited them to the White House, but they said it would be unseemly for us to come to you. So, why don't you come to us?
And so he did, and they told him to go around back, to the service entrance, and he could have a beer with the help. But, we're going to count the silverware before you leave.
Oh, and no, it doesn't have anything to do with 'skin color'- whatta ya think, we're a bunch of racists?
That was interesting on CNBC this morning, they had one of their trained puppy Republicans Ron Johnson. Ronnie sat there like a good-trained puppy of the rich bastards and obediently listened and agreed to screw over the regular people on the streets. Ronnie barely said a word he has been potty trained so well by rich bastards. Ronnie is just the typical politician who has been in Congress way too long with his deceit and lies as he lines his pockets with huge wealth. In addition, Ronnie lives in one of those districts that automatically votes him back in. Ron Johnson definitely is a good example of how lines get redrawn just so the GOP and rich bastards can continue deceiving the American people and the world.
Yes, let's not forget, Mr. Fournier, that when the president tried to do the gracious thing and called Boehner and McConnell after Romney conceded, they "couldn't" come to the phone because they were "asleep." And I seem to recall them also declining requests to come to a meeting at the White House because of "scheduling conflicts." I'd guess that all or at least most of their predecessors would have gotten out of bed to take that call, and had their staffs clear their calendars for those meetings. The president's schmoozing skills or lack thereof is not the problem.
Boehner has also refused other perfectly civil requests from Obama -
... President Barack Obama - planned address to a special session of Congress on his jobs plan in a time of severe economic crisis to the time when GOPers were holding a major Presidential debate. It raised eyebrows to say the least.But Speaker of the House John Boehner’s response now jumps the political — and historical — shark: he has refused Obama’s request saying Congress can’t act fast enough.
the first time a President has had such a request refused.Later reporting noted that Boehner is suggesting Obama’s speech compete with the opening game of the NFL season — something as seemingly coincidental as Obama’s choice for a speech. It seems like one more political message — another political flexing of muscles. The problem: Oftentimes such muscle-flexing suggests that the muscles are in one’s head.
...Boehner urged in a letter to the president that the speech be moved from Wednesday Sept. 7 to Thursday Sept. 8. His reasoning was not that the speech will conflict with the Republican presidential debate scheduled to take place that night. Rather, he argued that the House of Representatives won’t have enough time to pass the resolution and conduct the security measures necessary in order to officially invite the president to a joint session on Wednesday -– an explanation that is perhaps hard to swallow, considering Congress’ ability to pass massive pieces of legislation at the last minute.
Read more at http://themoderatevoice.com/121161/john-boehner-refuses-president-barack-obamas-request-for-a-special-session-of-congress/#2yK0RCMKsJ2YTsrJ.99
Name that tune !
I lost my comment, so I will summarize. The President is well advised to schmooze for the same reason all Presidents need to schmooze. The only way to learn an opponent's and a supporter's strengths and weaknesses is to study him closely. Schmoozing gives a President a chance to do that first hand. Face to face meetings are always the best.
If you look closely you will realize that the radicalization of the Republican party has seriously weakened the ability of the Republicans to shape policy. Yep they threaten to end the world as we know it if we don't meet their demands, but in the end they always fold. Seriously, when was the last time Boehner and McConnell didn't cave at the end of one of these fiscal cliff or debt fights.
They haven't passed a budget in 4 years, but they have become so adept at the continuing resolution government contractors haven't felt any pain. In the end the President nearly always gets what he wants out of Congress. The Republican leaders have to suck up to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity so they scream and shout and stompe their feet, but they always play ball in the end.
It's like they say - keep your friends close and your enemies even closer. Besides, at some point somebody on the right has got to come to their senses and see that what Obama wants for the country is better than whatever shinola Limbaugh and Hannity are pushing.
The sort of grand , if uncooked soft opinionated mush (think of rotten fruit) , which identified Autism as a proper view to base an intelligent mental health aspect into gun control , runs like happiness runs , in a circular motion . Without drawing out the patent nonsense into a diagrammed landscape , adopt Nancy Reagan's "Just say No !" . Refuse (where have you gone Peter Sellers ?) to be drawn in another Obvious stall and delay till the publics interest in the point is safely submerged in the partisan swamps of "Lets not and say we did ..." . Of course an entertaining mix of misty eyed solemnity is already on tap , from the Amen corners of Fox and Friends . Composed like a celebrity obituary from what once was the great news organs intrepid interns , our minds soon to be entombed in "sclerotica" from the usual suspects .
President Carter may be a genuine case where hubris was confronted by an equal (in terms of insufferableness) but opposite social circuits pride . Where President Carter may have profited from an interested parties advice on a peculiarly narrow and absurd avenue of thought , the so called opportunity only exists in the "concerned" minds of todays hyper partisans . If President Obama is an unattractive pedagogic drone who sorts things out in a layered vacuum of pristine engineering , let me know very quick .
The hyper partisan ambuscades content with flurrying filigreed layers of self righteous , insufferably pained consideration of the fictional cold pedagogic problem at the white house , is another level of stall and delay laid out in pearly phrases of powerful marshmallow muscularity . Yes , the strong back of a David Brooke who can tote more mush than a fella ever seen , can with his sister Maureen obfuscate a clear day .
Long winded, yet a good use of a thesaurus
The people who think schmoozing is the answer are the same ones that think if the politicians would just do some bipartisan socializing on the weekends instead of rushing home to their districts to ask donors for money, they would build friendships across the aisle, and partisanship in the chambers would vanish or at least lessen. Once upon a time, that was true. But that was in a time when the partisan lines were different, and there was actually room for compromise. The liberal & moderate Republicans have retired or been purged; the ideological lines are more pronounced now.
The underlying message is always the same. If the Black man would just behave more like the White people think he should behave then everything would be okie-dokie!
Yes republicans do'nt want to schmooze with the White House butler now do they.
Like attending a social event, schmoozing only works if there is some common ground somewhere. Since politicians must now define themselves purely by their politics (e.g. they don't "waste time" talking about their families) and since the politics of defining what the government should be is as divided as it was prior to the civil war, schmoozing is far less effective than iron control of your assets. Apparently unlike the rest of America, I've had it with trying to compromise with fanatics, and think we should get back to just presenting our case, building up our numbers, and rolling over those who diametrically oppose all we believe.
In former times when Schmoozing was bold
And hypocrisy wasn't quite as inventive
The chattel upped their load , and did as they were told
........................................... Thus ....................................
Politics and religion* ne'er were mentioned
*Let alone race ...
Shutting down the congressional whore house was a mistake. The bonding from a guys' night out is gone.
"And why doesn't interpersonal outreach work?"
First President Obama is a black man - and while that is a subject NO one will touch in the whole Kumbya America is so post racial it is exactly the point a black man & leader of the "free world" - so damaging to old white male psyche.
Second as a party the GOP have for at least a generation courted division and "otherness" within their party - "G-d/guns/gays/abortion" that is what the GOTP has been relying on to keep their seats of power. Even as Americans have moved on (sometimes too slowly) and begun to embrace change on LGBT rights, and more recently on gun regulation. And still the rabid party faithful religuluous know nothing have been whipped up into a frenzy - or don't you remember Americans showing up locked & loaded around Presidential speaking engagements?! The issue is that somehow (especially the low information crowd) are afraid of losing their entitled position in a land that is slowly gaining color, and the election of Barak H. Obama both terrified and solidified that reality. Just look at legislatures around this nation trying to stop abortion/birth control - that act is not aimed at women of color it is to enforce white women to have more white babies and raise the white population - this isn't an accident or a coincidence. The paranoia within the GOTP is palpable and on display everyday - just look at Congress.
The President doesn't need to schmooze with Congress, he's given them far more respect and treated them with more dignity then they have deserved! WE the PEOPLE need to have more open and honest dialog about race and how that makes white people feel - then we can come together & throw the real traitors to the PEOPLE out of Congress!
And of course, NOBODY brings up the fact that it's a little 'hard' to schmooze when Congress is only in DC THREE DAYS A WEEK! When FDR mixed drinks and LBJ went to the Hill, when Reagan invited the 'boys' over and joked with Tip O'Neil Congress STAY IN WASHINGTON over the weekend. Now they are in there and out, whining and sniveling about schmoozing.
FDR..... LBJ..... Reagan.... Obama
One of these things is not like the other....
The only way Obama can schmooze the current GOP crop is to server them drinks, in a waiter's uniform, and then mow their lawn and wash the car. He's BLACK....after all.
I think the GOP wants to clearly benefit from racial prejudice. They tried with Clinton calling him black AND gay at different times. But he clearly was neither so it didn't work so well. They've spent beaucoup time and money trying to make Obama someone "other than us"...Birthers, "He's a Muslim" "He's a socialist".... which all really mean "Look! He's black!"
I'm all for it on the fact that is good to have alternate smart opinions and views as an political party opposite to mine.But not stupid ones and fanatical as the Republican has and luster in it.And that is why they are an endangered species.Unless their god they are so proud of (even though they don't obeyed him) operates one of their so called miracles.Which I doubt it!!
these are the people that met THE NIGHT OF HIS INAUGURATION to formulate a plan as to how they would make him and one-term PRESIDENT and part of that was deciding to commit ECONOMIC TREASON against this country.
seriously?
the President is supposed to waste his time on this pack of sociopaths?
SERIOUSLY?
I love that the President and the First Lady don't socialize with these clowns.
their job is their job and personal is personal.
and, there's not one damn thing that ANYONE could point to that would have been agreed to by the GOP if the President had wasted his time on them during the past 4 years.
not one damn thing.
There is no compromising with insanity, and Republicans are affectually insane. I think that President Obama and the Democrats understand that they must somehow find their way around the obstruction because the Republican wall is just to high to get over to move the country forward. Following the Republicans is like this!
picture it: CONGA!! HAH-AHAH-HAH
Maybe the President does this and we just don't hear about it, but why not have a lunch, once a week, with Democratic House/Senate members (a la the campaign with contributors - but more frequently) and at the end of the month have those who have come previously invite a Republican they serve with to come for the "end of the month" lunch? Then, it's less of the Schmooze and more of the Networking mentality that seems more user-friendly where we the people are being represented in working lunches ... a venue for "friends and frienemies" to get together that opens the lines of communication for all concerned
The president has tried this, Judy. However, hoe can one garner Republican support when they vote down their own proposals? The whole problem with our governmet today is the TEA party blockade and Mitch McConnell's filibusters, and that's what needs to be eradicated from our government.
This reminds me of an old Myron Cohen joke: " A neighbor brought some chicken soup over to an elderly man who was very ill. When she got to the door with her offering, she was met by the doctor, who was leaving and had a very sad face. He told the neighbor that he was afraid the chicken soup wouldn't help. The neighbor replied, "It couldn't hurt."
Yesterday I saw the results of a study on people's willingness to change their ideas, values, and positions. What they found was that values were divided into two groups, one was the "sacred" and the other was the "profane." In other words, some values were not up for negotiation and others were. Discussing changing these value types lit up two different areas in the brain depending on whether they fell in the sacred or profane category.
You can project from this study that the rightwing values are generally sacred and they wouldn't change them even if their own mothers told them to, so shmoozing isn't about to do a whole lot of good in bringing the rightwing around to a position that will actually benefit the country if they have some quasireligious reason to object.