Doubling down...

It's hard to deny it: the President had a good political week last week. He signed the health care bill, reached an agreement with Russia on nuclear nonproliferation, and won a PR victory by visiting our troops in Afghanistan, unannounced. Seems like a perfect time for the President to build some political capital, prove to the public that he is listening (after suggesting otherwise for the past year) and shelve his ultra-partisan legislative agenda unless he garners significant Republican support. That's too logical for Washington. Rather, the President is going to take his waning political capital stock and double-down.

A senior Democratic official said the push was a textbook case of taking advantage of political momentum as the campaign season begins. Republicans are "on the defensive," the official said, "and as long as they're not cooperating, we ought to keep them there." - WSJ 3/30/10

On Thursday, the president challenged Republicans who planned to campaign on repealing his health-care bill with, "Go for it." Two days later, he made 15 senior appointments without Senate consent, including a union lawyer whose nomination had been blocked by a filibuster. - WSJ 3/25/10

For someone who came into office as the "first post-partisan" President, he's been anything but that.  According to Rasmussen, "Only 28% now say the president is governing on a bipartisan basis". Proving time-and-again his unwillingness to work with Republicans and an uncanny knack for revising the historical record on Republican participation / ideas throughout the legislative process.

His objective is clear: one of the few ways Democrats can avoid a shellacking in November is to make sure their base is energized. Given the partisan rancor this country is enveloped in, what better way to work towards this goal than lambasting Republicans? The only problem is, there are segments of the President's electoral voting bloc from 2008 that are net sellers, not buyers, of his first 15 months.

For instance, a study released by Pew Research in February about the Millennial generation (those aged 18-30) pointed out the following:

Politically, Millennials were among Barack Obama's strongest supporters in 2008, backing him for president by more than a two-to-one ratio (66% to 32%) while older adults were giving just 50% of their votes to the Democratic nominee. This was the largest disparity between younger and older voters recorded in four decades of modern election day exit polling. Moreover, after decades of low voter participation by the young, the turnout gap in 2008 between voters under and over the age of 30 was the smallest it had been since 18- to 20- year-olds were given the right to vote in 1972.

But the political enthusiasms of Millennials have since cooled —for Obama and his message of change, for the Democratic Party and, quite possibly, for politics itself. About half of Millennials say the president has failed to change the way Washington works, which had been the central promise of his candidacy. Of those who say this, three-in-ten blame Obama himself, while more than half blame his political opponents and special interests.

To be sure, Millennials remain the most likely of any generation to self-identify as liberals; they are less supportive than their elders of an assertive national security policy and more supportive of a progressive domestic social agenda. They are still more likely than any other age group to identify as Democrats. Yet by early 2010, their support for Obama and the Democrats had receded, as evidenced both by survey data and by their low level of participation in recent off-year and special elections.

The infatuation of young voters with Obama and his "Rock Star" personality shouldn't come as a surprise, especially if you read more about Millennials and what they believe. It also reminds me of the classic Churchill quote. The question is: can Obama invigorate his supporters when he's not no the ticket? Judging by this chart, he may have a difficult time.

To be fair, this is only one segment of his voting bloc, but it did represent roughly 20% of total votes, which is significant, and up from 17% in 2004, or a 17.5% increase in turnout within this single demographic.

While November is a universe away, it will be interesting to see how much of a bump this past week gives Obama (and Democrats) and how sustainable it is. Voter fatigue should be a real concern for Democrats, particularly given the amount of energy spent since 2006 to get where they are. If the generic ballot remains within its recent range (Republicans +6-9), the enthusiasm gap remains wide, and Independents continue to prefer Republican candidates, pandering to his base and not engaging the other team could be a losing strategy for the President.