Is President Obama is doing equally or better or worse than you expected?

[Douglas Carpenter]

[opihimoimoi]

1. BETTER THAN EXPECTED....he is being stifled by RW attacks and whining

but somehow....they cannot get to him....yet.

He is spreading POSITIVITY to counter the GOP's Negativity...seems like the best thing to do...

The GOP cannot change for their Forces are locked into the Bully mindset of arrogance and duplicity

When they do change...look for a gentler and more pragmatic Party...coming to the Center and leaning Left in some cases..

Overall, they are a DOOMED Party if they continue with Hucky, Palin, Mitt, and now Joe Scab....they can forget Newt..

[Douglas Carpenter]

2. I agree

[Optical.Catalyst]

31. The Republican Party is in a death spiral

It is becoming quite tiresome having the Republicans disrupt, oppose, and insert poison pill amendments into our legislation. The Republicans had eight years to make a difference, and they trashed the place.

It is time to just lock them out of all participation in Congress, and get on with fixing the mess the Bush Administration left us. No compromise with the Republicans, let us drive them into the ground.

[katandmoon]

3. So much fucking worse.

[graywarrior]

4. He's doing exactly what he said he'd do

Piss some of us off. I voted for him knowing that. I accept it. He's doing fine in my book.

[kid a]

41. +1

[fadedrose]

5. The opposition is worse than I expected................nt

[elizm]

6. BETTER.

[Diane R]

7. He continues to amaze me. Even when I don't agree with him I respect his opinion and trust him.

[Birthmark]

8. He's worse than I expected.

Still, he's a good example of why I shouldn't vote in this one party corporate system.

Millions of Americans thrown out of work and home...but thank god the big banks are "safe." LOL

[argonaut]

9. Don't be silly.

If the Great Depression showed us anything it's that we cannot let the banks fail. Period.

[Birthmark]

11. Bullshit.

The banks are of no consequence whatsoever. Besides, the vast majority of banks were fine. It was the big banks that screwed themselves.

Even so, there were other ways to shore up banking and improve the economy. For instance, instead of shoveling $750 billion to the banksters, we could have shoveled $750 billion dollars to consumers in the form of vouchers to be used only for paying down credit or mortgage payments. That would have amounted to about $2500/individual. That money, of course, would have ended up in the banks pretty quickly giving them an infusion and the consumer a much needed break.

Obama's Trickle Down New Deal is a joke that is doomed to fail. At best, it will reinflate the banks for a fairly short time. It does nothing for those who will default on their mortgages...causing more problems for the big banks. It does nothing to improve demand for credit --which drives 2/3rds of our economy.

The REAL problem in the Depression was deflation. The banks in the Great Depression pissed away people's money, leaving them penniless. This depression is quite different. Thanks to FDR, the FDIC would have (and has) prevented that from happening, so that the individual lost not a penny in their savings. So, the failure of banks means much, much less in 2009 than it meant in 1932.

[Dawgs]

25. I am amazed by the ignorance of your post.

One, there is no way that anyone with half a brain would say that it's okay for the banks to fail.

Two, $2500 for each individual would have slowed things down for about two months. The banks would have still eventually failed, and then every other business in America would have also started to fail. This would have caused a loss of tens of millions of jobs.

And you're assuming that Obama, after only 5 months of trying to stop an out of control recession, will do absolutely nothing else about fixing the economy.

Wow!!

[Birthmark]

29. The self-serving assumptions in your post are astonishing.

For instance, where do you come up with this gem: "Two, $2500 for each individual would have slowed things down for about two months." ??? That quote might take the cake for silliest thing that I've ever read. For a family of four, the total amount would be $10k. That's more than two months mortgage payments for all but a very, very few. It's more like eight to ten months of mortgage payments.

"The banks" is meaningless in the context in which you use it. Certainly, some banks would have failed. And some banks have failed already. So what? Tell us what the problem with failing banks is. How would it have caused the loss of "tens of millions of jobs?" You see, I think that you're full of stuffing and only repeating someone else's nonsense.

Obama is going to have to do something else. The crap he's tried thus far has only rewarded the banksters at the expense of the people.

[quiller4]

67. I am astonished by your post. Have you no understanding

about the impacts of bank failure on an economy? Have you read nothing about the Great Depression?

[girl gone mad]

28. And the Japanese experience has showed us that propping up zombie banks..

will lead to decades of stagnation.

The banks should have been put into receivership. Now we're in a much more dangerous situation.

[Birthmark]

34. Correct.

Allowing the banks that simply played gambling games to fail probably would have led to some *real* reform, not just in banking but generally. It would also have placed this mess squarely on the Republicans where it belongs.

Instead, by propping up the living dead banks, this will become Obama's mess, and probably not lead to the kind of progressive reform needed in banking and elsewhere in America.

[Sebastian Doyle]

64. What the Great Depression showed us

Is that Wall Street criminals are capable of creating such chaos to enrich themselves and fuck what happens to the rest of the country. In fact some of the very worst of these criminals (Morgan Chase) are front and center in this current scam just like they were in the last one.

[960]

10. He seems pretty ineffective.

He has given more life and fight to the GOP than 10 Hillary's could.

Don't know why he keeps playing the bi-partisan game..... they aren't going to play, and the GOP is dead. Just run them over and keep going.

[firedupdem]

13. Ineffective?

You are on another planet, or in another party.

[960]

20. No, just a Democrat disappointed with the DINO president.

[Dawgs]

27. Examples?

:shrug:

[firedupdem]

30. You were disappointed as soon as you got here.....

you aren't fooling anyone. Must be rough being in the minority. Gallup has him back at 63%.

[960]

36. Yeah, and I remember when bush was at 90%.

Just because the majority approve, doesn't make someone a good leader.

[firedupdem]

38. Well, what are gonna do about it? Keep posting here or start

an impeachment group? Anybody that puts shrub and obama in the same sentence isn't serious. Ready for the 4th?

[Sebastian Doyle]

63. And you're arguing with a troll who thinks Terry McUseless can be elected President

Just thought I'd point that out :rofl:

[Cha]

15. Fail.

[Dawgs]

26. I think you're blaming the wrong person/people.

Can you name one time that Obama hasn't gotten what he wanted (because of the Republicans)?

The only people that have been afraid of the Republicans are the Democrats in Congress.

[960]

37. He is ineffective in fighting for his campaign promises.

At the first sign of a fight, he folds like a cheap tent. On other issues he is completely absent. Haven't heard a word from him on GLBT rights other than to compare gay marriage to incest.

[readmoreoften]

12. Post the poll in GD and see if you get the same results. /nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

22. I might just do that, after this poll has run its course here.

[Cha]

14. President is doing

how imagined..not perfect but we're living in reality now(YAY) and I know he wants the best for our country and he's smart enough to go about it in the best way possible.

Love the President!

[GoCubsGo]

16. Seconded.

Considering all he has on his plate right now, I think he's doing about what I expected after four and a half months of being in office. NOBODY can fix such a disaster in that short period of time, especially when the Blue Dogs in his own party are making things even more difficult for him.

[Cha]

18. Some people get the big picture and

others can't even imagine what's going on behind the scenes..just the latest corporatemedia headline.

[Birthmark]

35. Well, if the "big picture" is...

...a corporate boot stomping on my already less-than-attractive face, then I see the big picture very well.

If the big picture is that Obama one day morphs into Superman and rights all the wrongs of the world through brilliant strategy and force or will...not so much.

[Skittles]

17. he is doing pretty much what I expected

which is why he was not my first choice

[LWolf]

19. Worse,

which is surprising, and pretty damned bad, since I expected to be unhappy with his administration.

[Fire1]

21. Better. n/t

[bigjohn16]

23. Worse. I will concede I was projecting my views of who I wanted him to be onto him. nt

[depakid]

24. Not sure how anyone wouldn't be disappointed in the Obama DOJ

The nominations, action and decisions coming out that agency (on many fronts) thus far are disgraceful.

And there's really no other way to put it.

[AlexanderProgressive]

32. Equally

Most promises have been kept so far.

[camera obscura]

33. About the same. Might be better, depends how the economy shapes up in a few years.

[Vidar]

39. A for eloquence, F for honesty.

[quiller4]

68. A for honesty, A for integrity, B+ for effectiveness. n/t

[omega minimo]

40. He's done much better at maintaining the status quo than I expected.

[Top Cat]

42. With the hand tha he was dealt he is doing better than expected.

That's why the GOP have completely lose any sense of reality.

[Arkana]

43. He's doing all right.

He's slowed the bleeding in the economy, done a good patch job on our world image, and begun the long road of reversing eight years of cowboy foreign policy.

However, he seems to me to want to play to the middle way too much--and he can't govern by consensus all the time. I just hope he learns that before it's too late.

[Raine]

44. BETTER, much, much BETTER

than I had every imagined or hoped, I'm THRILLED!!!!!!!!! :bounce: :applause:

[last_texas_dem]

45. Slightly worse

Which doesn't mean that I think he's doing a bad or even a sub-par job... It's also not due to me having unrealistically high expectations or thinking that he was going to govern as a hardcore liberal; in general, I think that, ideologically, he's governed similarly to how he campaigned. But there are a few issues on which I feel like he's been unwilling to stick his neck out and stand up for what's right- even if it means pissing a few more people off; there have been a couple of issues on which I've been surprised at how "status quo" Obama's actions have been.

[Swamp Rat]

46. Way too early to tell, especially since the fascist repuke obstructionist party is

doing their best to destroy a free and democratic America every chance they get.

I'm giving Obama at least 2 years before passing judgement.

[nolabels]

70. Yea, and why do they always know how good the cake is when it's still in the oven baking

The Happy Mellencampers

The joys, and pitfalls, of selecting campaign music
http://www.newsweek.com/id/150473

[LooseWilly]

47. I guess I really thought he could handle things as they came along...

... and that, with such brave speeches as the one he gave in Philly... that he'd have the courage to at least do what he could... but in the face of (predictable) opposition in the face of auto-company bailouts, Wall St. bailouts, and a healthcare fight... he's decided that he is better off not showing any courage on GLBT rights. The political motivations/arguments are obvious... and the history viz. a viz. Clinton's attempts are equally obvious... but with the poor beginning he had on the topic (Warren, being the most outstanding example) I would've thought he'd've had the courage to show some initiative on the subject.
Even just suspending dismissals under DADT until Congress re-examines the law would've won him some credit.

Instead of showing the courage that he showed in addressing the issue of race, in that speech in Philly, he's chosen to duck the issue of GLBT rights... apparently in the name of political expediency... and all the while Republicans are opposing him every step of the way on every other issue anyway... making the wisdom of alienating a portion of his base questionable at best. The opposition shows no signs of working with him on healthcare, let alone any sort of cap and trade system to try to promote "energy independence"/support emerging green technologies... on the whole it seems like a whole lot of give without any take to show for it. And meanwhile... he may lose a portion of his base.

It makes no sense to me politically, ideologically, or morally. If Republican disarray isn't an opportunity to be taken advantage of at this point in time... and worries over some sort of 1994 esque (and highly unlikely in this climate) is justification enough for shying away from platforms of his campaign... then I guess he really isn't ready to do the hard things to look out for his base even when he has the power... even within the context of his desire to re-establish governmental branch checks upon each other.

I am not impressed...

[styersc]

48. Sorry, have to say worse. Lots of Bush-redux and weak

performance on the economy. Worst of all, his honeymoon period is dwindling without any real accomplishment. Of course it is semi-satisfying to have a president who drives the right wing crazy but if they were less reactionary, they would see that he really has not changed that much.

[Deja Q]

49. There is a LOT on his plate, never mind restoring the US's reputation...

By and large, he's dong much better than I'd expected.

Can't like everything, obviously, but the guy has so much to do... and then he has to be belittled by the right wing nit-wits, extortionist-wannabe freaks like Chavez, and other various selfish interests.

[Blue_In_AK]

50. He's doing okay,

but I never have high expectations.

[QC]

51. Same. I expected a corporate functionary and got one.

Still better than Bush, but that sets the bar awfully low.

[MarjorieG]

52. Never expected the Dems to be so resistant, easily rattled and compromised.

Obama can explain why we need change and not to fear it, but he can't do it alone.

[abq e streeter]

53. worse, so far....its still early and I have hopes ( dwindling, but still there)

that because of his background and intellect, he will start moving forcefully for things I think he believes in deep down. But so far, it just seems like the same ol same ol': use the progressives as foot soldiers to get elected and then let the DLC types shove the "amateurs " out of the way and run the show again. I have no ego hang-ups about being wrong, and nothing would make me happier than to be proven totally wrong about Obama,and the bend over backward "bi-partisanship" I've seen so far that has me increasingly pessimistic about his administration.

[Sheepshank]

54. The economy is much worse than I expected. n/t

[whistler162]

55. Well since he didn't solve/cure all the nations problems

in the first second he was in office.... much worse<SARCASM>

<serious>We elected some one to do a job and from what I have seen so far he is doing okay. Not great, some misteps, maybe not as fast on some items as we all would like but he is doing the job. But, given the number of major hot issues delays in some areas that while important aren't, and may never be, at critical mass is expected.

[WI_DEM]

56. About as well--he's doing a good job. On gay issues he needs to do better (he's as bad as Clinton

was so far).

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

57. In some instances you should kick someone when they're down.

He has to do that with the republicans. They have become irrelevant. I'm not saying use the bush/rove approach of a few years back but I think he gives them more credibility than they deserve.

[uponit7771]

62. +1

[missTheBigDog]

58. Much worse

He seems to pander a lot to the dead GOP party. His approach to solving this 'crisis' is all wrong. The banks squandered their money in giving bad loans, let's give them some more money.

This country needed Al Gore in the worst way. Now we see the effect of electing a 2 year experienced senator for the highest office in the land has done.

[Lilyeye]

66. This sounds like a repuke talking point.

"Now we see the effect of electing a 2 year experienced senator for the highest office in the land has done."

I'd rather give the man time before I write him off as just a "2 year experienced senator" in only 6 months. :eyes:

[TomCADem]

59. Much Better - Pragmatic Implementation of Liberal Ideals

I think a lot of folks were looking for a liberal version of Bush, who ruthlessly implemented policies that were pure and liberal. I think President Obama's actions have shown him to be an effective President who is willing to make tough choices, rather than trying to govern from a sheet of talking points.

The real question is whether the base can actually provide grass roots support for those things they believe in, like a public option for healthcare. Or, will liberals use the fact that they disagree with Obama on something, anything, as an excuse for withholding support on things they say they actually believe in.

As the GOP demonstrated, it is easy to say no from the sidelines, but can you provide support for the President on the things that you believe in?

[FrenchieCat]

60. If we only had a fair media, he'd be doing so much better.....

But fighting the corporate entrenched interests who use to media to distort everything good
into something questionnable makes the President's job so much more difficult than it should be.

It is quite interesting that the media made Bush's job easier, and makes this President's job so
much harder. Tells us something about why this President can't just wave a magic wand
and get done what is needed.....

But some folks don't take that kind of "real" obstacles into consideration when making their
judgements on how well he is doing; but there are many of us who do understand that he is doing better than should be expected considering

....not to say that he's perfect, cause he sure isn't.....
But anyone who truly appreciating the load that he is carrying,
and see the barriers being thrown in his way have to give him some kudos.

[TexasObserver]

61. Worse. He's adequate in some areas, disappointing in others.

He doesn't seem to be on track to be a really good president, although that could change, I suppose. He's simply too eager to please those who disagree with him, and too unconcerned with those who put him in office. He's not dynamic.

He's far better than any Republican would be, but he's so far from the promise of his campaign it's not funny.

[zulchzulu]

65. The best President in my lifetime... without comparison...

Yeah, it's been 5 months. But I couldn't be prouder of Obama with all the issues and problems on his plate...

[StevieM]

69. I never expected much of him. But I am glad he picked Sotomayor (eom)