I'm trying to understand Rahm's latest doom and gloom pronouncement on the public option, and it befuddles me. It sure sounds like Rahm is saying that since they don't have the votes in the Senate today to pass the public option, before the White House has even lifted a finger to lobby Senators on behalf of the president's campaign promise, they'll therefore never have the votes:
Emanuel professed pessimism that healthcare reform would include a strict public (or "government-run") option, though he signaled an expectation that House liberals may still push for the prized reform.See, now to someone outside of politics, perhaps what Rahm said today made sense. Oh well, you might be thinking, Rahm is right, we just don't have the votes in the Senate - so let's just quit. But to someone actually in politics, what Rahm just said is awfully odd. He's openly saying that the administration's strategy for winning on any issue is to float their idea publicly, and if they don't have enough support at the git-go, before they've even tried to convince anyone, they'll just cave and walk away.
"I think Senate's been clear about the prospect there is," Emanuel told PBS's Charlie Rose when asked if healthcare can pass with the public option.
If that's the case, then why is Barack Obama even president? He didn't have the votes when he first started out in the race. Hillary was ahead in every poll. So why didn't he just quit? After all, Team Obama doesn't fight for things they believe in, Rahm is telling us - they simply quit at the git-go if the initial polls are bad.
In the actual world of politics, rather than the world that Team Obama is trying to sell us, politicians make proposals, then fight for them, then finally they assess whether it's worth continuing the fight. They don't make a proposal, not make any attempt to get support for it, suggest publicly that they don't even really care about it, then stick their finger in the air and take a poll - then quit. That is, unless they never wanted to win in the first place.
