Obama's poll numbers are slipping again.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

I know its hard for you guys when truth is displayed, but trust me you'll get used to it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You're right, but it would just be easier to attack me than to stay on topic.

You're way too sensitive.

[NickD 203]

Still only one guy that has to deal with a corporate controlled no term limit congress. The critics I have heard about him is that he is not talking to the American people about the obstacles he is running into. FDR was much better than that. So in this respect with him becoming wishy washy on these issues, and not laying out the facts, I hold him personally responsible for that. If he claims change, that change will only come about with laying out the facts to the American people, he is not doing that. So in my book, just another politician.

[HAL 9000 96]

Still only one guy that has to deal with a corporate controlled no term limit congress. The critics I have heard about him is that he is not talking to the American people about the obstacles he is running into. FDR was much better than that. So in this respect with him becoming wishy washy on these issues, and not laying out the facts, I hold him personally responsible for that. If he claims change, that change will only come about with laying out the facts to the American people, he is not doing that. So in my book, just another politician.

Could be. He sure needs to step up the communications a little more.

[nowhereman 1]

The Bush administration trivialized poll numbers, calling it a popularity contest. Now that Obama's numbers are slipping suddenly the right wing finds them to be relevant... once again blatant hypocrisy. The American public is fickle & at this point it wouldn't matter if Obama's numbers were at 80% approval or 20%... what matters is where they are 6 months before election time. Bush Sr's numbers were sky high after the Persian Gulf war, but when the euphoria wore off everyone looked at the economy (which wasn't doing too well at the time) and Clinton was elected.

I'm not saying that the opinions of Americans should be trivialized nor am I saying that at some point during Obama's 4 years we need to see some tangible results from his policies, but it's far too early to make a definitive assessment of where we'll 2-3 years down the road. Democrats should be concerned, but not panicked. Republicans need to keep the champagne on ice or they may just end up looking like the '86 Red Sox (i.e. they were celebrating moments before Bill Buckner screwed the pooch & lost the world series for them).

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Still only one guy that has to deal with a corporate controlled no term limit congress. The critics I have heard about him is that he is not talking to the American people about the obstacles he is running into. FDR was much better than that. So in this respect with him becoming wishy washy on these issues, and not laying out the facts, I hold him personally responsible for that. If he claims change, that change will only come about with laying out the facts to the American people, he is not doing that. So in my book, just another politician.

Could be. He sure needs to step up the communications a little more.

It seems to me that he's too concerned with getting broad level support from every which way that he isn't actually stepping up to set a bold direction for the national agenda. The two parties are so polarised that it seems that the executive is pretty much forced to take a partisan approach - using majorities to force through legislation.

If I remember rightly, that was very much an issue during Bush's first term.

Bush was deficient in a lot of other ways though.

The Bush administration trivialized poll numbers, calling it a popularity contest. Now that Obama's numbers are slipping suddenly the right wing finds them to be relevant... once again blatant hypocrisy. The American public is fickle & at this point it wouldn't matter if Obama's numbers were at 80% approval or 20%... what matters is where they are 6 months before election time. Bush Sr's numbers were sky high after the Persian Gulf war, but when the euphoria wore off everyone looked at the economy (which wasn't doing too well at the time) and Clinton was elected.

I'm not saying that the opinions of Americans should be trivialized nor am I saying that at some point during Obama's 4 years we need to see some tangible results from his policies, but it's far too early to make a definitive assessment of where we'll 2-3 years down the road. Democrats should be concerned, but not panicked. Republicans need to keep the champagne on ice or they may just end up looking like the '86 Red Sox (i.e. they were celebrating moments before Bill Buckner screwed the pooch & lost the world series for them).

Pretty much - its hard to say how much of the resentment actually comes from a rejection of Obama's policies and what he has done so far, as much as a response to the general condition of the economy and the availability of jobs.

[nowhereman 1]

I know its hard for you guys when truth is displayed, but trust me you'll get used to it.

Truth is awesome, but the double standard you see 3981 times a day on VJ sucks.

[HAL 9000 96]

The Bush administration trivialized poll numbers, calling it a popularity contest. Now that Obama's numbers are slipping suddenly the right wing finds them to be relevant... once again blatant hypocrisy. The American public is fickle & at this point it wouldn't matter if Obama's numbers were at 80% approval or 20%... what matters is where they are 6 months before election time. Bush Sr's numbers were sky high after the Persian Gulf war, but when the euphoria wore off everyone looked at the economy (which wasn't doing too well at the time) and Clinton was elected.

I'm not saying that the opinions of Americans should be trivialized nor am I saying that at some point during Obama's 4 years we need to see some tangible results from his policies, but it's far too early to make a definitive assessment of where we'll 2-3 years down the road. Democrats should be concerned, but not panicked. Republicans need to keep the champagne on ice or they may just end up looking like the '86 Red Sox (i.e. they were celebrating moments before Bill Buckner screwed the pooch & lost the world series for them).

*** Context ALERT!!! ***

Ehemm... You may also celebrate the '86 Mets you know...

[Danno 1,228]

The Religious Right are upset about his stance regarding Stem Cell support.

The Gun Lobby/NRA are upset that he is going to "Outlaw" their guns and ammo. Lots of hoarding of ammunition has taken place, driving up prices.

Fiscal Conservatives are upset about the Stimulus Plan - saying we don't need economic stimulus.

Not a bad try.

I would discount the Stem cell opposition, I would guess allowing tax dollars to pay for abortions might have more weight but with Gay marriage on the stage no one can keep their eyes off that long enough to worry about "other" things.

It seems the Health-control plans have more people fired up than anything..... and even people from the center.

Then you have some far lefties who feel betrayed over a number of things from Iraq to Gays.

The fiscally minded crowd sees we are headed for near certain financial ruin at the rate we have spent.... and the even greater Rate Obama is spending.

Meanwhile Barry is on vacation.