From Obama's perspective, there were four scenarios:

1) He doesn't go, Chicago doesn't win.

2) He doesn't go, Chicago wins.

3) He goes, Chicago wins.

4) He goes, Chicago doesn't win.

As it happened, scenario 4) occurred and Obama's going wasn't a decisive factor. However, he couldn't have known that for sure in advance. All he could know in advance was, as long as he went, scenario 1) would not occur. That would be the worst scenario, from his natural politician's perspective of perpetual self-aggrandizement.

By going, he eliminated the worst possibility for himself and had a nice little outing for himself and his entourage. In fact he builds up some sympathy at home for giving it the old college try. Basically it was a free road trip, with the possibility of scoring a big win (scenario 3), and the assurance of avoiding a big loss (scenario 1). Entirely rational for him to have gone.

BTW, forgot to mention, the reason I believe scenario 1) would be the worst for him is everyone would blame him for the loss. There would always be those second-guessers saying he should have gone.

I think he has many more pressing issues than lobbying for a sporting event. He needs to start respecting the Presidency as much as the Presidency needs to be respected.

And you're wrong, the worst is #4--which is what happened. Nothing worse than putting the prestige of the Presidency on the line for a pittance and being stood up.

For the outside world, President Obama's quality of not-being-George-W-Bush is swiftly becoming insufficient cause for adoration. Many Americans who voted for him have, or will soon, come to the same conclusion. Accomplishments are more important than rhetoric and there have been depressing few of the former. Those of us who hoped for the return to some level of bi-partisan sanity are (at least I am) sorely depressed. Instead we are hell bent on proving the proposition that, as a nation, Americans are dumber than a sack of rocks.

If you want bipatisanship, you should write to the RNC. They seem to have forgotten how to engage in the process in any way other than corrupt bullying. Also, you should look into the fact that we're suffereing from the worst economy in sixty years. Obama deserves some credit for keeping it from complete collapse -- or weren't you paying attention to that?

I think he has many more pressing issues than lobbying for a sporting event. He needs to start respecting the Presidency as much as the Presidency needs to be respected.

A year ago, in the middle of the economic crash, George W. Bush spent FOUR days as a spectator in the Chinese Olympics, chumming around with the jocks.

And Every Conservative in America thought it was the greatest thing in the world.

Of course, that was different, wasn't it?

Not it wasn't. Did Bush spend 1 million tax payer dollars to fly Barbara and Ophra over in a SREPARATE plane? No he did't.

No. He spent a lot more than $1 million to fly over the entire White Houser entourage to spend a week watching the sports and hanging with jocks while the American economy collapsed.

And you Conservatives loved every minute of it.

Phi-Steve,

Bush had a diplomatic obligation to attend the Chinese games. I don't see how anyone with at least two neurons and a synapse could see otherwise.

Please document that "diplomatic obligation" to spend four days "hanging with the jocks" during America's economic meltdown. You are obviously very proud of George W. Bush for doing so.

And, if you believe that the president has a "diplomatic obligation" to attend the Olympics, shouldn't the president also have a diplomatic obligation to securing the US hosts them as well?

(Of course you, like 100% of al Republicans, would rather choke on your hate than admit Barak Obama ever did anything right, ever. Party Rules forbid it.