Here's a guide to what he said - and what he meant.
What he said: I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria. I will not pursue an open-ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan. I will not pursue a prolonged air campaign like Libya or Kosovo. This would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective: deterring the use of chemical weapons and degrading Assad's capabilities.
What he meant: America, I get it, I really get it - no more war. Will you just believe me already?
Translation: Obama's bid never took off because voters and lawmakers didn't like the idea of another military operation in the Middle East or they didn't believe the strikes would be limited.
Despite more than a week of nonstop campaigning, Obama couldn't move the poll numbers. A Pew Research Center survey from Sept. 4-8 showed that 63 percent of adults oppose the strikes, a 15-point jump from a week earlier.
(PHOTOS: Scenes from Syria)
So even as he built up the case for action, Obama tried to remind voters who they elected.
"I know that after the terrible toll of Iraq and Afghanistan, the idea of any military action - no matter how limited - is not going to be popular," he said. "After all, I've spent four-and-a-half years working to end wars, not to start them. Our troops are out of Iraq. Our troops are coming home from Afghanistan. And I know Americans want all of us in Washington - especially me - to concentrate on the task of building our nation here at home, putting people back to work, educating our kids, growing our middle class."
Obama doesn't expect the poll numbers on Syria to turn around after one prime time speech - or perhaps ever, really.
"I'm good, but not that good," Obama told the Senate Republican conference during a meeting Tuesday.
(WATCH: Mike Allen's top takeaways from Obama Syria address)
What he said: And so to my friends on the right, I ask you to reconcile your commitment to America's military might with the failure to act when a cause is so plainly just.
What he meant: Hypocritical Republicans, you supported intervention before you opposed it.
Translation: The White House knew the president's attempt to seek congressional approval wouldn't be easy.
But aides acknowledge that they underestimated the extent to which Republicans who advocated for intervention days or weeks before Obama's announcement would flip so quickly and oppose the president's plan.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) made statements over the last two years that led the White House to believe that they would support the type of action that Obama had sought. But each senator came out against the resolution.
(Also on POLITICO: Obama's pitch: Someone should do something)
The Syria experience is now another data point in the White House's long list of grievances about congressional Republicans who take the opposite position of whatever Obama wants.
What he said: To my friends on the left, I ask you to reconcile your belief in freedom and dignity for all people with those images of children writhing in pain and going still on a cold hospital floor, for sometimes resolutions and statements of condemnation are simply not enough.
What he meant: Alright, liberals, your opposition forced me to recalibrate. But this Russia-Syria gambit isn't likely to work, so you're gonna have to accept a tougher approach.
Translation: Obama struggled just as much to win over progressives as he did Republicans.
But if the diplomatic efforts break down - or they never take off because Syria and Russia balk at the conditions - Obama insists he'll need Congress to sign off on strikes.
Aides said Obama could secure more Democratic votes at that point because he will have shown that diplomacy didn't work and the only alternative is military action. That's their hope, at least.
(Also on POLITICO: The diplomacy problem)
What he said: As some members of Congress have said, there's no point in simply doing a pinprick strike in Syria. Let me make something clear: The United States military doesn't do pinpricks.
What he meant: Don't listen to my secretary of state, John Kerry.
Translation: Kerry confused matters Monday when he said the strikes would be "unbelievably small."
The comment undercut Obama's claim that the military action would do serious damage to Syrian President Bashar Assad's capabilities and send a strong message that he can't use chemical weapons without facing retaliation.
"That is unbelievably unhelpful," Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) wrote on Twitter in response to Kerry.
Obama has been trying to roll back the damage of Kerry's remark ever since.
What he said: However, over the last few days we've seen some encouraging signs in part because of the credible threat of U.S. military action as well as constructive talks that I had with President Putin.
What he meant: I had a lot to do with this unexpected turn toward diplomacy, I swear!
Translation: Kerry's comment Monday that Syria could avoid strikes if President Bashar Assad turns over all its chemical weapons sounded off-the-cuff. And his spokeswoman even told reporters afterwards that he was making only rhetorical argument.
But Russia and Syria seized on the offer, and it appeared as if Obama had stumbled into a possible resolution of the Syria showdown - just as Congress prepared to deal him an embarrassing blow.
Obama sought to convey Tuesday that the breakthrough wasn't just luck.
He and Kerry had been talking with their counterparts in Russia for months about the role Russia could play in securing Syria's chemical weapons stockpile. And now administration aides are arguing that Obama's decision to strike Syria exerted pressure and forced the country towards a peaceful resolution.
"This is one of those situations where you create your own opportunities," a senior administration official said Tuesday. "We are fortunate that it happened at the right time."
