http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/11/white-houses-budget-strategy_n_847648.html The real answer here is "Sir, you are no Bill Clinton."
Say what you want about Clinton -- while he clearly did some stupid stuff (or, I guess, the better statement is "had a stupid chick do HIM"), he knew what people truly cared about and his "turn" to the center was consistent with his general history as a moderate southern Democrat. Obama was given the Dem nomination because everyone on the left believed he was far more liberal than Hillary Clinton. He hasn't been.
And he has a VERY disturbing tendency to simply give up on things that he campaigned in favor of (closing Guantanamo, trying terrorists in civil court, letting the Bush tax cuts expire).
Clinton was hated by his party for not pushing the party agenda. Obama is hated by the party for basically lying about what he would do when he got in office. Clinton was never viewed as a weak leader. Obama has been a remarkably weak leader AND yet, somehow, still gets ripped for being the devil incarnate by the GOP (at times, literally).
The country breaks down roughly 20% whacked out liberal, 50% center, and 30% whacked out right wing (e.g., Michele Bachmann supporters and the people who still thought in 2008 that GWB actually was doing a good job as President). Clinton could appeal to the 50% in the center and win despite losing many of the 20% on the left. Obama cannot do so. He will have to win the whole 20% and scrimp together 30.00001% elsewhere. Unless the GOP puts up Bachmann or Palin, it is hard to imagine Obama getting the full 20% or the 30.00001% given his current "negotiation by capitulation" strategy and his past claim to being champion of the liberals.