Had the media been up front with the sheeple over a year ago about who this guy really is; he would still be a worthless liberal senator from Illinois today. Unfortunately they were complicit in the election of a radical socialist (minimum).

It was only a matter of time, that people would finally see his true color's.

I truly believe that alot of Obama's approval/disapproval ratings have alot to do with the cabinet, appointee's and other staff that he has hired - and not just him.
I've been thinking his numbers drop every time something new comes out about those guttersnipes.
Just look at what is now coming out about his "safe school czar".

I think it has a lot to do with having done very little, and what he has done - such as his appointees - has been disappointing.

It's a rather remarkable feat to accomplish little and still manage screw that up.

CenterBHSFan wrote: I truly believe that alot of Obama's approval/disapproval ratings have alot to do with the cabinet, appointee's and other staff that he has hired - and not just him.
I've been thinking his numbers drop every time something new comes out about those guttersnipes.
Just look at what is now coming out about his "safe school czar".

Fisting Kits FTW!!!!!

gut wrote: I think it has a lot to do with having done very little, and what he has done - such as his appointees - has been disappointing.

It's a rather remarkable feat to accomplish little and still manage screw that up.

I didn't buy he would come into DC and dramatically change the culture and speed things up. Things do take time in a new administration. Most offices, including one I interviewed this morning, the National Nuclear Security Administration, do not have people even nominated or confirmed at the top. Most people that stay on are former Bush officials or mid level people. There is a lot of work for not that many people. Policy actually takes a good year + to fully get going.

That was/ is poorly communicated to the public, but is the reality of the beast. But, the slow/ little done is not a shock to me, but to lay people who heard all the dramatic change and assumed it would happen overnight are disappointed.

I still have faith in the foreign policy realm, as it is looking good so far. Domestic policy wise, I am frustrated by Congress more than the Prez, but acknowledge that the WH has done a piss poor job of reigning in the crazy D's.

So, not a surprise the numbers are dipping, but overall, again as I have stated many times, poll numbers do not really matter until the end of 2011, start of 2012. I'm not getting too upset over this.

I'm not at all upset over this either!

What will Obama's chart look like when he's done?

ptown_trojans_1 wrote:I still have faith in the foreign policy realm, as it is looking good so far.

If you're beholden to appeasement politics I suppose so. Carter tried that nonsense. Didn't turn out so well.

Very few presidents go out of office on a high note, in terms of popularity, so history says his ratings will be much lower at the end of his stint in office (which I dearly hope and pray is only one term).

believer wrote:

ptown_trojans_1 wrote:I still have faith in the foreign policy realm, as it is looking good so far.

If you're beholden to appeasement politics I suppose so. Carter tried that nonsense. Didn't turn out so well.

I disagree with that assessment. But, that is not a surprise. I think, overall, given the short time so far, it has been pretty good.

ricola wrote: I'm not at all upset over this either!

Of course not...."when you choose to be blind, you will always be blind".

Quote from a very smart person.

ptown_trojans_1 wrote:I disagree with that assessment. But, that is not a surprise. I think, overall, given the short time so far, it has been pretty good.

Ptown, I hope you are right but appeasement foreign policy rarely works.

When the sharks smell blood in the water and the lions sense weakness, they usually go in for the kill.

Writerbuckeye wrote: Very few presidents go out of office on a high note, in terms of popularity, so history says his ratings will be much lower at the end of his stint in office (which I dearly hope and pray is only one term).

One thing is certain, even if BHO gets a second term it won't be be a wide margin. The Anointed One promised to unite Americans but I've never seen anyone energize and rally an allegedly fading political movement in such rapid fashion.

I have a hunch the comfortable margin the Dems currently enjoy in DC is about to take a beating in the mid-term elections.

That's pretty remarkable when you consider the media has been attempting to convince us that the conservative movement had run its course based on the 2006 mid-term's and after BHO quickly bypassed Queen Hillary to thump the Republican sacrificial lamb known as John McCain.

Obama is failing at everything. He has made so many bad moves, made to many promises, let radicals in the house and senate like Pelosi run wild, spent money like a drunken pirate.

I have some different views about Obama and Pelosi. FWIW

I think Obama does reign in Pelosi somewhat. If he didn't, I think Pelosi would be much more spastic than what she is. She's not so out of control as she could be, in other words. And I think we can thank Obama for that.
I've wondered before what would it be like if HillBill would have won the Presidency. I don't think Pelosi would have gotten away with 1/2 the crap she has so far ... I think Hillary would have man-handled her so bad, that Pelosi would have been effectively curbed.
Don't get me wrong, I know those two women share alot of the same goals, it's just that I think Hillary is much more politically savvy and hard-edged than Obama and "bitches wouldn't get away with it".
Whereas I think Obama might feel sort of beholden to Pelosi and let's her slide a bit too much on key actions.

Of course, I could be wayyyyy off the mark here. But, we'll never know. It's just an interesting hypothetical to ponder.

ccrunner609 wrote: Pelosi represents the far far left wing of the base. In public Obama must appease her. Behind the closed door I might actually respect Obama if he would smack her around alittle.

Here's s fun tidbit to put the numbers in a little more context...and since everyone can't seem to stop talking about W all the time...

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/12/44_percent_would_rather_have_bush_in_office.php

Perhaps the greatest measure of Obama's declining support is that just 50% of voters now say they prefer having him as President to George W. Bush, with 44% saying they'd rather have his predecessor. Given the horrendous approval ratings Bush showed during his final term that's somewhat of a surprise and an indication that voters are increasingly placing the blame on Obama for the country's difficulties instead of giving him space because of the tough situation he inherited. The closeness in the Obama/Bush numbers also has implications for the 2010 elections. Using the Bush card may not be particularly effective for Democrats anymore, which is good news generally for Republicans and especially ones like Rob Portman who are running for office and have close ties to the former President.

So by all means...you people carry on whining about Bush. It's really paying some dividends!

believer wrote:

ptown_trojans_1 wrote:I disagree with that assessment. But, that is not a surprise. I think, overall, given the short time so far, it has been pretty good.

Ptown, I hope you are right but appeasement foreign policy rarely works.

When the sharks smell blood in the water and the lions sense weakness, they usually go in for the kill.

I don't see it as appeasement at all. I see it as a realist perspective, where the NSC carefully weighs the risks and benefits of certain issues and is not afraid or using both force and diplomacy.

Care to provide an example of "appeasement" and how we have given away the store for nothing?

He sux. The media frenzy surrounding him got him elected.

fish82 wrote:

CenterBHSFan wrote: I truly believe that alot of Obama's approval/disapproval ratings have alot to do with the cabinet, appointee's and other staff that he has hired - and not just him.
I've been thinking his numbers drop every time something new comes out about those guttersnipes.
Just look at what is now coming out about his "safe school czar".

Fisting Kits FTW!!!!!

FISTGATE hahaha!

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/07/fistgate-barack-obamas-safe-schools-czars-2000-conference-promoted-fisting-to-14-year-olds/

CenterBHSFan wrote:

fish82 wrote:

CenterBHSFan wrote: I truly believe that alot of Obama's approval/disapproval ratings have alot to do with the cabinet, appointee's and other staff that he has hired - and not just him.
I've been thinking his numbers drop every time something new comes out about those guttersnipes.
Just look at what is now coming out about his "safe school czar".

Fisting Kits FTW!!!!!

FISTGATE hahaha!

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/07/fistgate-barack-obamas-safe-schools-czars-2000-conference-promoted-fisting-to-14-year-olds/

Now admittedly I don't watch the news hardly at all, but if that's true, why isn't it getting more play in the media? I know everyone except Fox News is very pro-Obama, but how are they managing to evade that massive scandal?

tk421 wrote:

CenterBHSFan wrote:

fish82 wrote:

CenterBHSFan wrote: I truly believe that alot of Obama's approval/disapproval ratings have alot to do with the cabinet, appointee's and other staff that he has hired - and not just him.
I've been thinking his numbers drop every time something new comes out about those guttersnipes.
Just look at what is now coming out about his "safe school czar".

Fisting Kits FTW!!!!!

FISTGATE hahaha!

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/07/fistgate-barack-obamas-safe-schools-czars-2000-conference-promoted-fisting-to-14-year-olds/

Now admittedly I don't watch the news hardly at all, but if that's true, why isn't it getting more play in the media? I know everyone except Fox News is very pro-Obama, but how are they managing to evade that massive scandal?

Well for one, it's not a "massive" scandal per se. It's still not like the guy was actually caught doing the deed to farm animals or something. It's more on the level of Van Jones...just another "thing that makes you go 'hmmmmm'" about the people that BO has chosen to surround himself with.

I would think that an Obama appointee teaching 14 year olds how to fist would be considered a "scandal".

CenterBHSFan wrote:

fish82 wrote: Just look at what is now coming out about his "safe school czar".

Fisting Kits FTW!!!!!

FISTGATE hahaha!

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/07/fistgate-barack-obamas-safe-schools-czars-2000-conference-promoted-fisting-to-14-year-olds/
[/quote]

This is ridiculous, and why is here the first place I've actually heard about it? The media should be roasting this guy. Personally, this is my gripe with gays. It is fine if you want to do it, whatever, but you don't need to try and get people on your side, or teach school children that it is a normal thing to do.

Truly, I don't believe for a minute that President Obama condones anything like Fistgate. I don't believe that he knew the extensive backround of K.Jennings. That is the problem though. Alot of the guttersnipes currently working for the Obama administration weren't checked out very well.
And I think that's what President Obama is guilty for - not knowing enough about his staff/administration.

CenterBHSFan wrote: Truly, I don't believe for a minute that President Obama condones anything like Fistgate. I don't believe that he knew the extensive backround of K.Jennings. That is the problem though. Alot of the guttersnipes currently working for the Obama administration weren't checked out very well.
And I think that's what President Obama is guilty for - not knowing enough about his staff/administration.

Certainly Obama must shoulder all of the blame for this guy (and Van Jones) even getting a position of authority -- but here is where not having a real Fourth Estate almost destroys the foundation of this country.

If we had a media like the one that hounded George Bush at every turn, you would not have had ANY of these appointments. They would have been uncovered early and killed.

But because the media has abdicated its role as watchdog and become protectors of Obama, we've seen too many examples like this.

As someone who got his degree believing in the critical nature of a healthy Fourth Estate -- and worked to further that (albeit on a local level) -- it disgusts me to no end when I see what the media in this country has become.