Steve Chapman asks an obvious question (via Andrew):

How can conservatives forget that Obama is a consummate politician who has never taken the path of high risk?

The idea that Obama will be “unleashed” in his second term doesn’t have much to support it. Consider what George Bush was able to accomplish during his second term. It won’t take long to review the record, because there wasn’t much. Second terms are often infamous for being unproductive and scandal-ridden. Bush’s second term was marred by the administration’s illegal behavior (torture and warrantless wiretapping) and the worsening conditions in Iraq. The main initiative on Social Security that Bush briefly pursued at the start of his second term failed thanks to overwhelming resistance from Congress. The rest of the second term was mostly one of political stalemate with the new Democratic Congress, and the failed immigration bill was the only major piece of legislation that Bush wanted that came close to being passed.

The Bush administration regarded their extremely narrow victory in 2004 as a “mandate,” but that meant nothing in terms of achieving significant legislative or policy goals. Politically, the country was sick of Bush and the GOP by 2006, and 2010 notwithstanding it is not yet certain that the Republicans have fully recovered from the experience. The people who should be the most worried about Obama’s re-election are progressives. After the general election (assuming Obama is re-elected), Obama won’t really need them, and his actual instincts to accommodate entrenched interests are the ones that would be “unleashed.” Despite Obama’s likely increased “centrism” in a second term the hostility towards him would become even greater, much as it did during Clinton’s second term.