This is coming from the man who had a Senate supermajority and squandered it by letting Republicans decide what proposals he'd take, all in the name of that mythical bipartisanship. Nothing he says on "going too far left" is valid.
He had a super majority for, like, 8 months.
I can't even begin to wrap my brain around how almost a quarter of a term isn't enough to come up with a better plan than what was pushed through, considering it's not like he sat on his hands and passed nothing during that time--he actively went out of his way to pass legislation that appeased Republicans when it was wholly unnecessary.
It wasn't even a quarter of a term with a supermajority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress#Party_summaryThe caucus had 60 voting members for
a month and a half. Franken wasn't sworn in until July. Kennedy died in August. 59 Senators were elected in the caucus (including Franken) in 2008; they didn't reach a 60th pledged member until Specter changed parties in April. The only thing the supermajority had any power, scope or time to address was
appropriating supplemental money for federal programs like Cash for Clunkers.
Not really sure what you wanted the man to do (your post is, notably, lacking any specificity whatsoever). The most consequential legislation during this time (the Stimulus Package) he courted Republicans but very little of what they wanted appeared in the final bill (they were outraged at the lack of tax cuts and only three out of hundreds of GOP members voted for it). There are tactical complaints you can make about Obama during this time (and Boehner and Cantor have since laid out a strategy Obama could have taken that
actually would have won over Republican House members in earnest) but I don't really see you approaching any of them.
