This is a different question than can he turn things around and I pose the question from a different perspective. I don't like the 2 party system. I don't like party politics. I like Obama. I disagree on proablably 3/4 of his policy that I have read. I didn't vote for him and wouldn't if the election was held today. But can I support him and hope he succeeds in solving problems? Yes I can. I would be very happy if President Obama had a successful term and I would define success in these broad areas: 1. A dramatic decrease in total federal debt. 2. Restoration of Constitutionally protected civil liberties; which would include a removal of the Patriot Act and associated laws and executive orders. 3. A withdrawal from conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan; including a stop to military interevention into other sovereign nations without a Congressional and Constitutional declaration of war. 4. A dramatic reduction in the total number of abortions. I think he is supportive of most of those 4 to some extent at least in principle. Even if those expectations that are personal to me are not met if we were to come out of the recession without too much suffering that would be a great accomplishment. I am ready to cheer the new president on several other fronts also. I really challenge those who don't support him to give him room to succeed. He may not meet my expectations going in, but I would rather be wrong about it and see some really good things happen under his watch. What about you? Can you give him a chance?
If they don't win a championship by 2012.... hey wait a minute you're baiting me... where's my prozak?
Way to jinx it.... I didn't vote for him, but I'm approaching everything with an open mind. I will give him a chance. I hope he proves me wrong for not voting for him. If he does, I will happily eat crow in 4 years.
That's all anyone can ask for. Bush did not become so unpolular just because he is a Republican president, he got there by the things he did and what shape the country is in after he left the office. We should judge Obama by his actions and the shape of the country by the time he leaves office, not by the words he speaks today, even if I liked his speech.
A great four, rhester. I too would like to see these. I give a significant chance of 4-year progress in #2, half of #3 (Iraq), and somewhat #4. I think there's little chance for progress in #1 unless we see a dramatic and steep rebound in the economy. Even if he's efficient with fed. spending, it will take a nicely chugging GDP to start paying down the debt. It will be interesting (?) to see if you get any replies from the people you are really targeting. I'm not holding my breath. It is sad; as someone who thought Bush would be a terrible president, I still supported him generally, extended a benefit of the doubt, and lauded his good deeds until the Iraq fiasco. (I did critique his treatment of science from the get go.) So many arguments I had with my liberal neighbors here in SF defending him, until Iraq...
While I would not place your #4 that high on my priortiy list, I would replace it with national health care. The prospect of near-universal health care will probably do more to achieve your #4 than anything else. Irrespective of the moral/religious implications of the issue.
Impossible for #1 to happen anytime soon. Assuming we come out of the recession/depression in the next 2-3 years, quite possible he could make a big, big dent in the deficit by the end of his second term. We had our shot at debt reduction but W. wasted the gift from Clinton. It will take a long time to get back to that point. I too am hoping for #2 and the first steps he's taken, both yesterday and today, create some definite optimism on my part that we will get there. Likewise, I am hopeful on #3. I seriously doubt Obama will give up the now established power of military intervention, but I do think he will bring much more balance to the process and not involve us in anything as stupid as Iraq. I do not think he would go to "War" without Congressional authority but I see him holding on to the power for military intervention where he sees American interests threatened. I'd like to see #4 occur as well. Bu if it does, it won't be primarily because of a policy Obama implements (though realistic, age appropriate sex ed would not hurt at all), but will come from the changes he both reflects and leads in our society.
I think he can succeed at making people feel better while the business cycle goes up. Frankly I have a hard time believing that the president has much impact on the economy.
I have already read enough bashing to start the thread for exactly that reason. Why hate? Why bash? I don't agree with alot of policy stuff, but I don't see how anyone can not like his personality and approach. He is pastoral in his speaking IMHO.
yeah I prefer a classic speaker over a pastoral speaker so you cannot really say that is a plus. pastoral speech is almost by definition speaking down to your audience or blowing smoke.
I wouldn't doubt that. But given that Ron Paul isn't really a Jesus freak, I imagine rhester would vote Buchanan in a heart beat if the guy were on the ticket.
I live in Texas so I wrote my name in. First vote I have every received in a presidential race. They listed me as 'other' in the paper. I would not vote for Buchanan. Ron Paul??? I like him alot, respect him highly, but I am glad he is not a serious candidate because I think it would kill him to be in that office. I listed 4 items dear to my own heart, but there are many other issues important to me, healthcare, the poor, drugs, youth... in fact the most important issue to me in the entire nation is the character of our youth. I am limited federal government and pro-individual liberty w/ responsibility when it comes to politics. I don't expect the federal government to do what I am supposed to do. Nor do I favor the federal government telling me what it is I am supposed to do. I like the Constitution and feel it serves us well as a restraint to the power of government.
i realize i'm speaking for rhester here....but whether someone is a christian or not is probably not a determinative factor in rhester's vote...because i'm guessing he's voted for more than a few who he believes were nothing more than "nominally" christians. "I'd rather be ruled by a competent Turk (Muslim) than an incompetent Christian." - St. Augustine
