The Obama Administration thread

[Bodhi]

So Obama just blamed George Bush for the dems losing a seat in Massachusetts.  Anyone else see this?  Priceless.  Apparently they are so fed up with what George Bush supposedly did to the country that they voted for "change" in Mass, even though it was for a republican and the dems have been running things since 2006.  Keith Olbermann couldnt have spinned that any better himself! 

[D]

Obama is great at reading a teleprompter and coming up with catch phrases... he has always strangely reminded me of Dwayne The Rock Johnson.......

Americans are so ready and eager to bend over and take it up the ass it makes me sick.

When gas was 4 dollars a gallon, we kept buying it... back in 1773 they would've thrown the shit into the Boston Harbor.

Americans cant think for themselves for the most part.. its as bad as racism.. u are raised to believe a certain way and it keeps getting more and more warped as time goes by.

It is frightening the amount of people who are unable to say one negative thing about Obama or even Bush when he was in office..

If u seriously think Obama is doing a great job...... insert face palm smiley.

[sandman]

Poll: Frustration with D.C. fueled GOP in Mass.
2 in 3 Brown voters say they are dissatisfied with Democrats in Washington

WASHINGTON - Dissatisfaction with the direction of the country, antipathy toward federal government activism and opposition to the Democrats' health-care proposals drove the upset election of Republican Senator-elect Scott Brown of Massachusetts, according to a new post-election survey of Massachusetts voters.

The poll by The Washington Post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University's School of Public Health underscores how significantly voter anger has turned against Democrats in Washington and how dramatically the political landscape has shifted during President Obama's first year in office.

Sixty-three percent of Massachusetts special-election voters say the country is seriously off track, and Brown captured two-thirds of these voters in his victory over Democrat Martha Coakley. In November 2008, Obama scored a decisive win among the more than eight in 10 Massachusetts voters seeing the country as off course.

Nearly two-thirds of Brown's voters say their vote was intended at least in part to express opposition to the Democratic agenda in Washington, but few say the senator-elect should simply work to stop it. Three-quarters of those who voted for Brown say they would like him to work with Democrats to get Republican ideas into legislation in general; nearly half say so specifically about health-care legislation.

When Obama was elected, 63 percent of Massachusetts voters said government should do more to solve problems, according to exit polling then. In the new poll, that number slipped to 50 percent, with about as many, 47 percent, saying that government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals.

Like Obama, Coakley won more than 70 percent of those pro-government voters, but the bigger pool of voters seeing government overreach helped Brown claim victory.

Health care topped jobs and the economy as the most important issue driving Massachusetts voters, but among Brown voters, "the way Washington is working" ran a close second to the economy and jobs as a factor.

Overall, just 43 percent of Massachusetts voters say they support the health-care proposals advanced by Obama and congressional Democrats; 48 percent oppose them. Among Brown's supporters, however, eight in 10 said they were opposed to the measures, 66 percent of them strongly so.

Sizable majorities of Brown voters see the Democrats' plan, if passed, as making things worse for their families, the country and the state of Massachusetts. Few Coakley voters see these harms, and most of those backing her see clear benefits for the country if health-care reform became law. Less than half of Coakley's supporters say they or the state would be better off as a result.

Among Brown voters who say the health-care reform effort in Washington played an important role in their vote, the most frequently cited reasons were concerns about the process, including closed-door dealing and a lack of bipartisanship. Three in 10 highlighted these political machinations as the motivating factor, 22 percent expressed general opposition to reform or the current bill.

Coakley voters, by contrast, cited the need to cover the uninsured and fix the health-care system as the main reasons the issue drove their vote.

Massachusetts enacted a universal health-care plan several years ago, and the survey shows that it remains highly popular. Overall, 68 percent of the voters in Tuesday's election say they support the Massachusetts plan, including slightly more than half of Brown voters.

Obama also remains highly popular in Massachusetts. More than six in 10 of those who voted approve of his job performance, with 92 percent of Coakley voters expressing satisfaction, along with 33 percent of Brown's. More than half of Brown's backers say Obama was not a factor in their vote.

But the Obama administration's policies draw some fire, with nearly half of all special-election voters either dissatisfied or angry about those initiatives. Nearly three-quarters of Brown's voters expressed the negative view.

Republican policies prove even less popular, with 58 percent of Massachusetts voters saying they are dissatisfied or angry about what the Republicans in Congress are offering. Among Brown voters, 60 percent give positive marks to the policies of congressional Republicans, but a sizable number, 37 percent, offer a negative appraisal.

The Massachusetts election brought another indication that the Obama coalition from 2008 has splintered, just as the results in gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey showed two months ago.

Compared with the 2008 presidential results, Coakley suffered significant erosion among whites, independents and working-class voters, according to the new survey.

In Massachusetts, independents made up about half of Tuesday's total electorate, according to the new poll, and they supported Brown by nearly a 2 to 1 margin. Obama carried Bay State independents by 17 percentage points in 2008. Among Brown voters, 29 percent said they backed Obama over Republican Sen. John McCain.

Tuesday's competitive election caught many poll-watchers by surprise, with news interest in the campaign peaking too late to organize an exit poll of voters on Election Day. The Washington Post, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University conducted this poll to provide a more complete picture of the stated motivations of special-election voters.

The poll was conducted by conventional and cellular telephone among a random sample of 880 Massachusetts residents who say they voted in the special election. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus four percentage points for the full sample.

Polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta and special consultant Mike Mokrzycki contributed to this report.

? 2010 The Washington Post Company

[polluxlm]

If u seriously think Obama is doing a great job...... insert face palm smiley.

Obama is doing a great job, if you're already rich!

What, you thought his responsibilities lay with the people?

[superstarmc]

What's ridiculous is that dems are saying people are voting republican leaders into office because they are angry at what's happened over the last eight years, meaning the Bush/Cheney admin.  So people are voting republican because they are angry at republicans?

[The Dog]

Plouffes playbook for the Dems...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/22/AR2010012204216.html

I agree about healthcare. get it done, but just the bare minimum. pre-existing conditions and the other no brainer things, but leave out the controversial stuff.  Would repubs dare vote against pre-existing conditions? its a win-win... get out GOOD healthcare reform and get the repubs to vote with you.

then go after the banks. big time.

if the state of the union isn't all about jobs, Obama is an idiot.  you can still talk about the environment and healthcare so long as you tie it back to jobs.  both are job creators.  he can even talk about 'don't ask don't tell' and say it'll make us safer by getting more translators and intelligence people in. 

I don't think hammering Bush/Cheney will work - it's fine and appropriate to bring up the crazy spending, tax cuts for the rich and the source of the financial crisis, but you can't harp on it.  Bring it up, be fiery about it, but move on quick.  People want solutions.

[sandman]

it's gonna be interesting to hear Obama's new approach this week.

some of the experts are saying climate change is probably dead at this point.

[superstarmc]

Obama gives a good speech but unfortunately that has become detrimental to him. Because one of two things happens afterward:
1.  He dosn't do what he said he was gonna do.
2.  He goes and does the exact opposite of what he promised.

[The Dog]

it's gonna be interesting to hear Obama's new approach this week.

some of the experts are saying climate change is probably dead at this point.

if hes smart, he'll include it but spin it so it's something that will help the economy while it saves the planet at the same time.  People care more about their jobs right now then future generations.  Investing in green technology and tougher laws on emissions will lead to new, green jobs.  no reason why that can't be a great new biz for the future.

Everything he talks about tomorrow should be about jobs and the federal budget.  thats it.

i am confident he'll talk the talk, the key is if he walks the walk....

[Jim Bob]

get out GOOD healthcare reform and get the repubs to vote with you.

thats simply not going to happen.  the GOP's only goal is to hurt the majority party, so don't count on them to vote for ANYTHING.   Politics over Country, thats the Republican way.

[sandman]

i was not impressed with Obama's speech last night. i'm actually kinda shocked.

last week he said something about being out of touch with the american people. he was right.

[superstarmc]

More importantly he's losing touch with his own electorate.  Districts who voted for him overwhelmingly are voting for republicans, not because the republicans have made a complete recovery but because they're trying to send message to washington.

[freedom78]

More importantly he's losing touch with his own electorate.  Districts who voted for him overwhelmingly are voting for republicans, not because the republicans have made a complete recovery but because they're trying to send message to washington.

What message are Republicans sending other than "No" to everything?

[pilferk]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35141308/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/

That could prove to be very good news to this administration.

[pilferk]

i was not impressed with Obama's speech last night. i'm actually kinda shocked.

last week he said something about being out of touch with the american people. he was right.

What was it you didn't like, exactly?

I actually thought it was a very populist speech...more to the voters than it was to the other 2 branches.  He addressed some VERY populist issues, like tax cuts, job creation, and a whole host of other things that most of the American voters have recently said they want to have more of this administrations focus.

There was some good bi-partisan stuff sprinkled in there...thats why the Repubs are taking such a bashing for their reaction (both during and after the speech).  They're essentially "dissing" some of the very things they SAY they want, usually.

[sandman]

i was not impressed with Obama's speech last night. i'm actually kinda shocked.

last week he said something about being out of touch with the american people. he was right.

What was it you didn't like, exactly?

I actually thought it was a very populist speech...more to the voters than it was to the other 2 branches.  He addressed some VERY populist issues, like tax cuts, job creation, and a whole host of other things that most of the American voters have recently said they want to have more of this administrations focus.

There was some good bi-partisan stuff sprinkled in there...thats why the Repubs are taking such a bashing for their reaction (both during and after the speech).  They're essentially "dissing" some of the very things they SAY they want, usually.

i didn't like his comments about health care. he seems to be trying to push it down our throats. i thought it was smug to say something like...settle down, review it, and let me know if you have any better ideas. memo to obama....the debate on that bill is done. we don't like it. take the good points, add a couple more, get rid of the BS, and then you're on to something.

and the speech was kinda disjointed and all over the place. he also seemed to be contradicting himself...congress has failed, but i'm still gonna rely on them to fix your problems.

i also didn't like the comment about the worst being behind us regarding the economy. it came early in the speech. i believe this will end up being a true statement, but we have all thought this in the past and turned out to be wrong. i don't like people making speculative comments as fact.   

then there were a few times where he touched on transparency, and for me, that's just a giant elephant in the room. don't try to sell me on transparency and new ways of operating in washington after the health care bill debacle. 

[freedom78]

i didn't like his comments about health care. he seems to be trying to push it down our throats. i thought it was smug to say something like...settle down, review it, and let me know if you have any better ideas. memo to obama....the debate on that bill is done. we don't like it. take the good points, add a couple more, get rid of the BS, and then you're on to something.

Fair enough, in theory, though the problem is that Congressional Republicans believe that the vast majority of it is BS and all we need is tort reform.  Yeah...because torts are the reason 45 million people are uninsured. 

Maybe Obama should take a page out of Bush's playbook and threaten to veto any defense spending that doesn't include massive healthcare reform.  If Republicans can risk national security to push their agenda, I don't see why Dems can't as well.

and the speech was kinda disjointed and all over the place. he also seemed to be contradicting himself...congress has failed, but i'm still gonna rely on them to fix your problems.

I felt it was a little disjointed at the end.  The big stuff was the beginning and middle, then the end was smaller stuff, which made it seem choppy. 

Overall, I thought the speech was fine, if too long.  The President was funny...both toward himself and of Congress.   

[sandman]

i didn't like his comments about health care. he seems to be trying to push it down our throats. i thought it was smug to say something like...settle down, review it, and let me know if you have any better ideas. memo to obama....the debate on that bill is done. we don't like it. take the good points, add a couple more, get rid of the BS, and then you're on to something.

Fair enough, in theory, though the problem is that Congressional Republicans believe that the vast majority of it is BS and all we need is tort reform.  Yeah...because torts are the reason 45 million people are uninsured. 

  

they also believe in selling across state lines.

for most americans, some cost control measures combined with getting everyone access (which is far less than the 45 million people) would be a win-win.

but to your point, if the Dems had created a good bill (or if they create one now), they could easily expose the Republicans.

[superstarmc]

In 3 years he'll be back in Chicago building habitat for humanity homes with Jimmy Carter.

[freedom78]

i didn't like his comments about health care. he seems to be trying to push it down our throats. i thought it was smug to say something like...settle down, review it, and let me know if you have any better ideas. memo to obama....the debate on that bill is done. we don't like it. take the good points, add a couple more, get rid of the BS, and then you're on to something.

Fair enough, in theory, though the problem is that Congressional Republicans believe that the vast majority of it is BS and all we need is tort reform.  Yeah...because torts are the reason 45 million people are uninsured. 

  

they also believe in selling across state lines.

for most americans, some cost control measures combined with getting everyone access (which is far less than the 45 million people) would be a win-win.

but to your point, if the Dems had created a good bill (or if they create one now), they could easily expose the Republicans.

I don't object to selling across state lines IF we apply a universal set of minimums.  As it is, people don't know what their own states mandate, let alone what some company in another state may cover or not due to state law.  In other words, people will seek out good deals and suddenly realize that their diabetes isn't covered for some reason, because it was based on another state's regulatory policies.

I'm not sure how much it matters to expose Republicans.  They force a supermajority on everything and it's widely known.  About 3/4 of the GOP Senators come from pretty hardcore red states and simply are not vulnerable.  Most who were truly vulnerable were swept from office in the last two elections and those who remain (with a VERY few exceptions) wouldn't vote to seriously increase regulation.