It’s just a few more hours until the game changes again in tonight’s debate on foreign policy (whoooo!) so let’s have a PostScript about what, during this particular game, one could actually expect from one of these guys winning the actual election, which PostScript is assured by the mainstream media will actually happen. Won’t that be amazing! So, E.J. Dionne Jr., what would actually happen if President Obama is reelected?

All the stuff he tried to do before, Dionne tells us in today’s column, but with more political support!

Dionne points out that if Obama wins, it will prove he’s got a big enough coalition that his political opponents would have to start listening to them, too. So it all depends on the electorate, which is actually pretty much like how it’s supposed to work. Hurrah!

Commenters, though, are a lot more critical of Obama’s first-term agenda.

Adam_Smith quotes Dionne’s rhetorical question and answers it:

“Can anyone argue that translating the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reforms into workable regulations is a minor undertaking?”

No. “minor” is the wrong word. “Inadequate” is or, to elaborate a bit, “dangerously inadequate” as it too strongly relies upon the wisdom, resources and integrity of regulators and their discretion to avoid the next financial calamity. As such, it stands in the way of the truly needed structural reforms. It is not a “minor” accomplishment. Indeed, an even better yet term would be “negative accomplishment.”

WrittenDescription says that more of the same, even with a more agreeable Congress, doesn’t make for progress:

Obama has described his second-term agenda; he has been unclear about why that agenda will produce better results than were achieved in his first term. Huge chunks of the “savings” depend on future Congresses and Presidents following through on the proposed spending cuts.

Mostly, though, commenters don’t like that it’s Dionne telling us all this, not Obama, or not Obama in a flashier way.

independent64 wishes for better marketing, even dumbed-down:

I’m an Obama supporter, but if it takes E.J. Dionne to explain what his plan for the next four years is, he’s done a poor job marketing it the the American public. Say what you want about the vagueness of Romney’s 5 point plan, at least it’s something the average American can hold onto and remember.

Seems stupid, but if Obama just did what Romney did - give the plan a label--like “5 Point Plan” - he’d be in much better shape. This is marketing 101. The people must be given a way to remember the product.

HGF78 finds it awfully curious that the Obama campaign’s having this problem:

In the last election, Obama was very well marketed. He had great use of social media, targeted ads and getting people out to push him. That seems to be missing this time. You have to wonder why he doesn’t have that same spit and shine? I wonder if he accomplished in his first term what the corporate sponsors really wanted. I think it was the corporate idea of mandated healthcare. So the real question is what corporate help wasn’t he offered this time?

crozetproject has an explanation:

As for what corporate help he didn’t get, it’s no secret that Wall Street has deserted Obama. He had the temerity to mention that they blew up the US economy. Though he hasn’t prosecuted them as he should, him saying this rather than thanking them has apparently caused them all to go for Romney. They also no doubt like the prospect of having one of their own in the driver’s seat.

To use Dionne’s formulation, Obama’s ability to win without the corporate/Wall Street support crozetproject cites would make him more able to make tougher policies against them. That also sounds remarkably like how it’s supposed to go, so we can all be pretty sure it won’t happen.