Barack Obama: First Socialist President of the United States!

Next November, we will witness the first comprehensive assessment of the performance of President Barack Obama and his government. This will be within the context of the midterm elections, in which the U.S. voter will choose the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate as well as local leaders and more than half of state governorships.

If the secondary elections that were held last year to fill some vacancies are any indication of what is to come, then two opposite forces will compete in shaping the outcome: first, a sharp decline in the intensity of support that accompanied the election of Obama for the presidency two years ago among the circles he polarized, with consequent losses that would follow for his party; and secondly, an actual split within the ranks of his opponents in the Republican Party, thereby leading to uncoordinated efforts and missed opportunities to take advantage of declining popularity of the president and his allies.

However, without a doubt, the decisive factor in this midterm election is President Barack Obama himself. As much as he succeeds and is able to convince the public of his success, he and his party will be rewarded by winning elections. As much as he is branded with failure, it will improve the Republicans’ prospects.

There is no doubt that Obama, who is the model president in his life and person, reached the presidency under exceptional circumstances. He and several of his aides and supporters point to the challenges he faced: two wars, each one costly enough to drain the country’s resources; and a financial and economic crisis that almost affected Social Security and problematic predicaments that still plague the future of this safety net, especially the issue of health insurance, which is complicated by the increase in life expectancy and the approaching retirement of the post-World War II baby boom generation.

As for his critics and his opponents, they see the uniqueness of his election from a different perspective. For the first time in several decades, the president’s party has a majority in both houses of Congress.

In this case, Obama can reap the benefits of the spending begun by his predecessor, George W. Bush, to curb the worsening financial crisis by focusing on the fact that the crisis was a legacy of the previous administration, while the solution will take place during his time. So, which one is Obama? The young president who is confronting enormous challenges or the famous personality with good fortunes, who has no other option but to be exposed and sink?

Critics of President Obama’s performance have many complaints, several of which would probably be included under the culture wars that have been going on in the United States for decades. Obama, if we can read through his words and actions, has progressive leanings, socially and economically, locally and globally. He seeks to preserve a concept that is inherent in the progressive movement on the subject of social justice, in terms of the redistribution of taxes on wealth, the adoption of comprehensive health insurance under the supervision or management of the federal government and the strengthening of civil rights for historically disadvantaged groups, that is, ethnic minorities, women and gays. He is working on changing the image of the U.S. abroad, returning to parity with allies and extending an open hand to foes, all while working hard to emphasize the importance of compromise and communication with the opposition party in drafting the internal decision.

As for Obama’s opponents, they see his statements regarding the importance of communication with the opposing political team and the need to adhere to ethics in speeches and conduct, as talk that is far from reality. They refer to the President relying on his allies, exclusively, to pass his laws and call attention to his verbal attacks on numerous past and present adversaries.

In fact, speeches vilifying the former administration and taking credit for the positive developments in the country are almost a necessity for the president’s staff. His opponents believe that he used his party’s influence to pursue a course that is far from the center path typically charted by American presidents.

Opponents of President Obama complain, in particular, about him adopting a populist rhetoric, that within its framework, he not only repeats criticisms of certain economic sectors (for example, banks and insurance companies), but he also accuses those in charge of them of greed and harm to the citizenry. If Obama’s allies believe that the president’s words reflect the facts, the opponents see it as an opportunistic means for electoral mobilization.

But the opponents’ complaints of his actions exceed their uneasiness regarding his statements many times over. They realize that the president, by preventing an easing of the tax burden on the wealthy class, which was made possible by his predecessor to stimulate the economy, and through his granting of tax and service concessions to large sectors of the society, had introduced a fundamental modification to the nature of the political and socioeconomic system in the United States. About half of the population is exempt from taxes today, with many of them receiving various forms of government aid.

The taxes are low for an additional number of middle class people, while a small segment of the wealthier bears the bulk of the tax burden. President Obama then secured himself a wide electoral base and deprived those high earners of their right to the fruits of their labor. This situation is described by some of the president’s opponents as socialism, considered to be incompatible with the American concept of social justice, which is based on voluntary collaboration in social development. The president is seeking to speed up the move toward socialism, according to these opponents, through the appointment of a Supreme Court justice who will adopt the same ideas.

The extent of overstating the current situation by the president’s opponents lies in that he is proposing and working on implementing ideas that are not new but rather ideas that each former president from the Democratic Party had sought to apply. To talk about the uniqueness of Obama’s course and the fundamental alteration of the nature of the American structure is in turn, an effort to drum up support. Neither side holds a monopoly on verbal baiting.

Indeed, the policies of President Obama, both internally and externally, remain shaky, and some of his escalating talk and actions are of concern to centrists and independents, a concern that is subject to grow if the reasons behind it were not addressed. However, Obama’s first ally remains the inability of Republicans and conservatives to offer a convincing alternative and put forward leading personalities who exude confidence and internal coordination among their members. Until then, accusations of socialism and populism are not sufficient to defeat the president.