Dick is right about one thing (and, I think, only one thing). Midterm elections are always disadvantageous for the Democrats because their voters are less politically engaged. But it’s not necessarily a fatal burden, as the 2006 midterms demonstrated. When our base is motivated it will show up in great numbers. As for the rest of Morris’s analysis, it’s historically inaccurate and dishonest.

In his telling, Clinton was wiped out in the 1994 midterms exclusively because he pursued liberal policies. We know some of them: HillaryCare, Gays in the military, and two major gun control bills. Because the first two efforts failed, Clinton was hurt coming and going. But it was the gun control issue that proved most toxic to his congressional majorities.. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban have to be seen in the context of Ruby Ridge and Waco, which were not liberal policies but events. While the Ruby Ridge massacre occurred during the 1992 campaign, it was still very much on people’s minds in the 1993-94 period, and the overall picture made a lot of people feel that the government was willing to attack its citizenry and disarm them of their ability to defend themselves.

There was a degree of backlash over social issues pursued by Clinton, but this was a minor factor. Much more important was a full-on delegitimization effort (supported even by the New York Times) that trumped up a non-existent Whitewater affair, and even went so far on the fringes as to accuse and investigate the Clintons for the possible murder of one of their closest friends, Vince Foster. By election day in 1994, the right-wing was very riled up.

But the liberal base was depressed. And they were depressed in large part because Clinton was not liberal enough. The passage of NAFTA had a deep chilling effect on organized labor’s enthusiasm and the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy was unpopular. The base was also depressed because Clinton was ineffective. He was unable to get a vote on campaign finance reform or his health care bill. Finally, the relentless attacks on the Clintons’ integrity and character had some effect on liberal enthusiasm, either through sheer exhaustion in defending them or because some of it was believed or assumed to be partially true.

The Republicans are doing their best to replicate these conditions. They do their best to make Obama ineffective by blocking as much as they can and slowing down the pace in the legislature so that less can be done. They are using their vast media resources to delegitimize the president, even going so far as to suggest he’s ineligible to be president. They are compelling Obama to seek center-left solutions that are demotivating to his liberal base. And they’re whipping up conspiracy theories about dealth panels and imminent socialism to scare the crap out of their base. We can’t overlook this, from Dick Morris, either:

In Obama’s case, his reliance on minority voters adds to the difficulty as he drives racially fair whites to see him as governing primarily in the interests of minority voters.

Obama’s decision to have his Justice Department sue Arizona over its immigration law — despite the fact that American voters back the statute by 2:1 — is the latest illustration of that leftward drift. So is Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision not to prosecute the Black Panthers who posted themselves at a mixed-race polling place in military uniform with clubs to deter white voters.

That’s a new angle that Bill Clinton didn’t need to worry about despite being our “first black president.”

The difference between Obama and Clinton so far is that Obama has passed every single bill he has gotten behind and he has mostly avoided failures that gain him no support from either side.

I think the biggest problem Obama has right now, other than the extremely rough hand he was dealt compared to Clinton, is that the progressive media (which didn’t exist for Clinton) is doing whatever it can to demotivate the base. The right-wing would never do this. They stuck with Bush through thick and thin, and they stuck with McCain and Palin even when it became absurd to defend them.

I want to remind you of his list of accomplishments, beginning with the bills he’s signed into law.

2009

January 29: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
February 4: Children’s Health Insurance Reauthorization Act
February 11: DTV Delay Act
February 17: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
March 30: Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009
April 21: Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act
May 20: Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
May 20: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009
May 22: Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure Act of 2009
June 22: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
August 6: Cash For Clunkers Extension Act
October 22: Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act
October 28: Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act
October 30: Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act
November 6: Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009

2010
March 4: Travel Promotion Act
March 18: Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (HIRE Act)
March 23: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
March 30: Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
May 5: Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010

Of course, there’s a lot of missing detail in just listing the bills signed. Others have compiled more comprehensive lists that flesh out what’s in those bills and add on his appointments, presidential directives, foreign policy achievements, and even some important symbolic acts.

You might not be too impressed that Obama is the first president to have a Seder in the White House or care that bodies can now be filmed as they arrive home at Dover AFB in Delaware. But you should be impressed that he expanded Pell Grants, strengthened the Freedom of Information Act, cut funding for missile defense, expanded the SCHIP program, improved our vaccination programs, provided funding for stem-cell research, won a credit card bill of rights, filled the Medicare Part D donut hole, improved pay, benefits, and health services for service members and veterans, expanded AmeriCorp, got the FDA to regulate tobacco, and limited the salaries of White House staff.

All of this seems to go unmentioned and unappreciated in most of the liberal blogosphere. And that’s the small stuff. Obama has passed the biggest health care bill since 1965, rescued the auto industry, got almost all TARP money paid back, and is on the verge of passing the strongest financial regulations since the 1930’s.

He’s also reinvigorated the anti-proliferation and nuclear disarmament efforts by working successfully with Russia and China.

In a year and a half, he’s already done more than Clinton and Carter combined did in twelve years. Yet, for many, he’s a corporatist, or too soft, or a failure because he didn’t pass legislation through a deadlocked Senate on progressive terms.

This is so short-sighted and self-defeating that I find it immensely frustrating. We’re our own worst enemy. Dick Morris is wrong about the president being too liberal for the American electorate. His problem is that almost no one is willing to talk about his accomplishments in flattering terms. How do you motivate your base by downplaying the most prolific and progressive Congress and president in forty-five years?

It’s just the liberal temperament, I guess.