Can't Win For Losing

David Brooks thinks losing pretty much every vote on his agenda, being publicly rebuked by House Dems on the tax deal and people actually asking if Obama is still relevant meant a good week for the President.

The fact is, Obama and the Democrats have had an excellent week. The White House negotiators did an outstanding job for their side. With little leverage, they got not only the unemployment insurance, but also an Earned Income Tax Credit provision, a college scholarship provision and other Democratic goodies. With little leverage, they got a package that could win grudging praise from big-name liberal groups like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Center for American Progress.

Moreover, Obama has put himself in a position to govern again. The package is popular. According to the most recent Gallup numbers, 67 percent of independents and 52 percent of Democrats support extending all the tax cuts. Higher numbers support extending the unemployment insurance. Obama is reminding independents why they liked him in the first place.

He only needs to work on two things. He needs to explain his method better than he did in his press conference. It is entirely consistent to support a policy and be willing to move off of it in exchange for a greater good or a necessary accommodation. That’s called real life.

Then he’s got to bring this networking style to the larger issues. It’s easy to cut a deal that explodes deficits. It’s harder to cut one that reduces them. But there are more networks waiting to be built: to reform the tax code; to reduce consumption and expand productivity; to reform entitlements.

Washington doesn’t know how to handle coalition-building anymore; you can see consternation and confusion all around. But did anybody think changing the tone was going to be easy? 

Only one problem there, Dave.

Obama didn't "get" any of those.  And Republicans blocked all the other things on his agenda all but killing them completely because they realized that Obama really does score a win for the reasons Brooks mentioned if he can get this deal worked out.  The deal will therefore be changed.  House Dems aren't going to move on the estate tax cut, and Republicans are increasingly against the payroll tax cut.

Compromise is needed, yes.  If this deal passed as is, it would be a good week for Obama, especially if that meant DREAM Act, DADT repeal, and START ratification was done as well.

But what Brooks still is incapable of understanding is that the Republicans will never allow such a win for Obama.  So it really doesn't matter what House Dems think in the end:  Senate Republicans will run out the clock no matter what Obama does and then the Republican House will introduce their own tax plan and force Obama to sign it or else.

I don't know how this counts as "compromise" but apparently Brooks is unaware of the definition of the term.