Fineman wrote a fair article discussing the missteps and unlike some of article on the same subject it goes deeper than calinng an Obama idoitic weaking. I particlary agree with his point that too little attention was foucused on selling the plan to thosewith insurance. Also that maybe it would've been better to delay cap and trade he points that Obama used a lot of capital with blue dogs on that issue and I would add that it also ate up time in terms drafting and voting for the legislation that could've been used on health care
Too many 1,000-page bills
Americans are not an ideological people, for the most part. If they have an ideology about government, it is a hypocrisy: they want small government but they want government to address their every need.
It is not good politics for a president to rub this hypocrisy in their noises, and Obama has done just that. It’s not entirely his fault.
He had a near-Depression to deal with, and a banking crisis of mammoth proportions. But all the telephone-book-sized legislation and proliferation of czars left a lot of independent voters scared — and they are running from him now.
Focusing on the have-nots
From the beginning, some of Obama’s shrewdest (outside) political advisors have been telling him — almost waving their arms — that the sweet spot on the issue is clamping down on abuses by insurers.
In other words, the White House all along should have been focusing on the fears of the 85 percent who have insurance, not on the 15 percent who do not
These days the president is calling his plan “health insurance reform,” but it is late in the game to reframe the issue.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32460087/ns/politics-white_house//