Strategists Worry Obama's Popularity is Dropping
Some worry Obama's honeymoon with the public and the media may be over
President Obama is heading into stormy waters. His healthcare plans have stalled on Capitol Hill; he is being faulted for a shaky response to the post-election violence in Iran; his job-approval ratings are dropping; and confidence in his handling of the economy is ebbing. The warning signs are enough to worry Democratic strategists that Obama may be sinking into a trough that will sap his influence just when he needs it most.
Until now, President Obama has enjoyed a honeymoon with the country and the media (although not with opposition Republicans). This was because the supremely articulate, charismatic Obama presented such a contrast to George W. Bush, who remains unpopular. In addition, voters wanted action from their president in tough times, according to Democratic pollster Geoff Garin, and Obama delivered. In fact, he has moved the federal government into a more activist role than it has had under any other president in years, bailing out the financial industry, taking over much of the U.S. auto industry, injecting vast sums of money into the economy, and proposing huge changes in healthcare, energy policy, and other areas of national life. Finally, Obama is very appealing as an individual, which initially boosted his ratings.
But the ground may be shifting. Over the past couple of weeks, Obama has endured a surge of bad news, reversing his momentum. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that one of the major Democratic healthcare proposals being circulated in the Senate would cost an astounding $1 trillion; the estimate for another plan was even larger—$1.6 trillion. This sent legislators scurrying to reduce the price tags, which will in turn cause delays in considering the massive bills this summer and could jeopardize passage in the fall.
Another setback came when two powerful insurers' associations announced their opposition to an Obama-backed government health plan that would be in competition with private, employer-sponsored plans. In a letter to senators released this week, America's Health Insurance Plans and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association wrote, "Regardless of how it is initially structured, a government plan would use its built-in advantages to take over the health insurance market." But Obama told a news conference Tuesday, "The public [government] plan, I think, is an important tool to discipline insurance companies."
Beyond healthcare, unemployment continues to rise, and Obama has conceded that it will probably exceed 10 percent later this summer. The economy remains in a recession, and forecasters say there will be more pain ahead. Overall, Obama's programs have run up the deficit by astronomical margins, at least $1 trillion this year alone. This has sparked criticism that he is breaking the bank, and the public seems increasingly rattled. A Washington Post/ABC News poll this week found that while 65 percent of Americans approve of Obama's job performance, his positive rating has declined by 4 percentage points since April. Only 52 percent say Obama's ballyhooed $787 billion economic stimulus program has succeeded or will succeed, down from 59 percent two months ago. Americans are evenly split, 48 to 48 percent, in approving or disapproving of how Obama is handling the deficit.
"I see his popularity continuing to diminish," says Frank Donatelli, former political director for President Ronald Reagan and current chairman of GOPAC, a conservative political action committee. "He'll come down to a more normal level."
In the most serious foreign crisis of his young presidency, the violent crackdown on protesters after the disputed presidential election in Iran has made Obama seem off balance. At his news conference Tuesday, he finally got tough with his rhetoric. But his critics argue that his response has been weak and that his newfound toughness comes too late to do much good in helping the Iranian reformers who are battling the government.
Adding to his problems, there has been a noticeable increase in tension between the president and the press corps. At his news conference, reporters were more adversarial than they've been since he took office, and they homed in on topics that made him uncomfortable, such as his response to the abuses in Iran and even his inability to give up smoking.
Clearly, some of Obama's luster is wearing off. The question is whether his setbacks will be temporary or mark the start of a long-term decline for his presidency.
- See photos of Obama abroad.
- See photos of Obama behind the scenes.
Reader Comments
Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown Continues:
Obama’s attack on our free market economy began long before the current crisis. The following legal documents, news articles, and videos show his part in causing this crisis over the past fifteen years. Now he uses it as an excuse to do even more damage. To him, our free enterprise system is a giant merciless beast that he and his allies have succeeded in wounding. In a free market, your choices as a consumer, select against society’s losers, which he represents. This is why the Obamabots, having won, are still seething with hatred for their opponents. Having wounded the beast they are now closing in for the kill. The recovery of our free market economy is not their objective. They would rather replace it with something else. So their policies are only making matters measurably worse. They want revenge for the unfairness they perceive in the free market.
These legal documents show Barack Obama suing Citibank under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) from 1994 to 1998, where he and other lawyers got $950,000 in legal fees without finding any evidence of wrongdoing:
http://clearinghouse.wustl.edu/chDocs/public/FH-IL-0011-9000.pdf
http://clearinghouse.wustl.edu/chDocs/public/FH-IL-0011-0007.pdf
This was part of a legalized protection racket perpetrated on our nations banks, and part of a widespread systematic shakedown, described in detail in this article published in the year 2000: "The Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown That Bodes Ill for Cities":
http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_1_the_trillion_dollar.html
The New York Times reported on this in 2003, and explained what additional regulatory action the Bush administration tried to initiate to protect the banks, in "New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae", only to be blocked by Democrats in congress:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
Obama, ACORN, Bill Clinton, the Clinton Administration, and members of congress explain what happened here in their own words in these videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hN31-nKndg8&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-TyH6Yupso
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314
This video connects the dots:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487
Thomas Sowell summarized it all in his column, "Do Facts Matter?":
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGRjODM1MTJlOGZiZDk2ODI4NTUzMWMxYjgwMjliMGQ
The Washington Post provides additional detail: ("Where Was Sen. Dodd? Playing the Blame Game On Fannie and Freddie"):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/11/AR2008091102841.html
The Wall Street Journal provides additional detail: ("Blame Fannie Mae and Congress For the Credit Mess "):
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212948811465427.html
This pattern of behavior must be stopped to protect the economic future of our country.
Bob of MO, (part 1 of 3)
You wrote:
"Barry... have you ever tried thinking outside the box. More that Democrats are WRONG and Republicans are RIGHT? Hardly anything is black and white any more."
That was already cliché more than ten years ago. The box you need to be thinking outside of is the one known as the boob tube. I always think for myself.
You wrote:
"too many links to click everyone of them, so your thoughts will go as incomplete."
They weren't intended for you. Intelligent people not fully informed can be persuaded. Polls show this happening now, as we see at town hall meetings. You’re not interested in getting the truth get out. I won’t persuade you with evidence; I intend to defeat your political objectives by informing others.
You wrote:
"You say Government is the problem not the solution. Great. Lets disband the Govt. Local too! No more police, no more fire department... if you[r] house burns down, it's up to you to get your neighbors to help u put it out. Roads? Hope your Escalade is in great shape cause a year of driving over those potholes will mess it up quickly and the repair shops will start price gouging everybody.”
Escalade? Hardly. My car is more than 20 years old.
You wrote:
"Why? Well because they can, cause you see, there will be nobody to complain to. No State Attorney General Office. Lemon Laws? All gone. I wonder who will inspect all the cattle to make sure it's safe to eat? Which one of your buddies will get up and do this? And how will they let me know when they find a problem?
Now of course I’m exaggerating. But really the problem with health care is that in fact there aren't enough people to stick up for the little guy. The big company's like Blue Cross spend millions on lobbyist to make sure it get little attention. Why do you think this is?"
There is a proper roll for government. When government goes beyond it's proper roll as it already has in the case of healthcare, it does far more harm than good. Creating your 'strawman argument', you indicate you have no principled understanding of where to draw a line between the proper roll of government and the proper roll of a free-market in a free society. The free market is the only real protection for ‘the little guy’, among which I count myself as one of many. Your examples only create a false sense of security, and fail to recognize your own responsibility for how you spend your money, as you chose whom to give it to. Companies that can please us best will prosper most. Those that can’t will go out of business to be replaced by others, if they can’t run to government for protection from our decisions in the free market. Once we start down your slippery slope, the history of Europe, Asia, and South America already tells us where we will end up. This is why our founding fathers were unique in explicitly describing the principles of our rights government exists to defend.
Bob of MO, (part 2 of 3)
You wrote:
"Also if government health care is soo bad why are we the ONLY 1st class country in the world without it? Sometimes it's better to admit we were wrong that to be stubborn and continue doing things the old way just so it doesn't interrupt your nightly viewing of Nightline."
We are the only 1st class country, and we have the only 1st class healthcare system. I've traveled to two-dozen cities and towns in Europe, and a dozen cities and towns in Japan. So I know for a fact that no one else in the world has a standard of living equal to ours. They do not even come close. Traveling the world would help you to appreciate that the lifestyle available to the average American is only available to rich people in Japan and rich people in Europe. A tenant in a high-rise public housing project on Chicago's Southside, gets a larger apartment than an average Japanese family in a Tokyo high-rise. Yet Japan has the second most powerful economy in the world, second only to our own, with a population equal to half of ours. Keep in mind that they have passed up every nation in Europe even after loosing WWII. Japanese people also have a work ethic that allows them no time for a life outside of work. They are far from catching up with our lifestyle, and yet far ahead of every nation in Europe. Returning from trips abroad always makes me feel thankful that I happened to be born an American. I quit watching Nightline nearly twenty years ago for the reasons I gave previously.
You wrote:
"Please understand that it won't be a perfect system. Nothing is ever perfect the first time around. There is a learning curve. Some things won't work. Some things will."
That's why we need such things to be decided in the free market, where each of us can decide what works best for our own circumstances, rather than being forced to pay for the government plan, even if we don't want it.
You wrote:
"Barry I'm gonna take back my first comment. I think you probably were an outside the box thinker years ago. I am not interested in name calling or insults. But I wonder, when did you stop deciding for yourself instead of actually forming an opinion. All the links, youtube, ect... this is somebody else's fight and you just jumped right aboard. You watched a youtube vid, said yep and that's it. Found a gazillion more just like it to support THEIR agenda. Remember two sides to every story. Your a smart man. Why not try to listen to both sides?"
I was against 'Hillarycare' before I ever heard of YouTube, for the reasons I gave above. I do not expect to change someone’s philosophical beliefs with what I write. But I know that more people will turn against nationalization of healthcare if they know the truth about it.
advertisement
