Here is a strong dissenting argument against the Drew Weston essay I linked to yesterday from Kevin Drum at Mother Jones:

[T]here’s precious little evidence that [Obama] turning into a fiery partisan warrior would have impressed the public much at all. What it would have done is unite the Republican Party even more unanimously against him. Most likely that means no stimulus, no financial reform, no DADT repeal, no nothing. He might still have gotten healthcare reform thanks to the filibuster-proof majority Democrats had in the Senate for a few weeks at the end of 2009, but that’s it. Your mileage may vary, but I think that’s a much worse outcome for Obama’s first two years in office.

Beyond this, I think Westen misses the big point. The problem isn’t that Obama didn’t have a story. He did, and he told it pretty well. His story was one about the dysfunctional partisanship destroying Washington and how to move beyond it. You might not like that story, but it was there. And while it obviously didn’t succeed in moving the needle on partisanship, it did allow Obama to produce a pretty decent set of legislative achievements. As much as two years of anti-conservative stemwinders would have thrilled me, I doubt they would have produced anywhere near as much.

This too you should read. As I mentioned in the closing paragraph of that first post, many analysts consider the Obama Administration, taken as a whole, one of the most successful modern terms and its accomplishments even historic. And, quite simply, he will be the clearly preferable alternative in 2012 based on the current crop of GOP contenders.