So what things has the president done well?
February 9, 2010 3:12 AM Subscribe
So what things has the president done well?
Obama, of course. Thing is, from anecdotal evidence I can't see any change. Yeah, his attitudes very different from the other one, but that's all I know of. He doesn't seem to be shutting down Guantamino well, his healthcare reform doesn't look that peachy, so what has he done that's better than his predecessor? Has he improved your life in any way?
Obama, of course. Thing is, from anecdotal evidence I can't see any change. Yeah, his attitudes very different from the other one, but that's all I know of. He doesn't seem to be shutting down Guantamino well, his healthcare reform doesn't look that peachy, so what has he done that's better than his predecessor? Has he improved your life in any way?
This post was deleted for the following reason: This question could have been phrased as to be answerable but instead seems to be encouraging chatfilter. -- vacapinta
You might find the St. Petersburg Times Obamameter of use:
PolitiFact has compiled more than 500 promises that Barack Obama made during the campaign and is tracking their progress on our Obameter.
We rate their status as Not Yet Rated, In the Works or Stalled. Once we find action is completed, we rate them Promise Kept, Compromise or Promise Broken.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:21 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
PolitiFact has compiled more than 500 promises that Barack Obama made during the campaign and is tracking their progress on our Obameter.
We rate their status as Not Yet Rated, In the Works or Stalled. Once we find action is completed, we rate them Promise Kept, Compromise or Promise Broken.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:21 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
Track his campaign promises. There are separate bars for ones that are "completed" and "in progress."
He's remade the regulatory state. He's signed equal-pay legislation.
Also, things he's "done well" is very subjective. Is his shift in Afghanistan policy good? Were his financial stimulus and bailout good? (Note: we avoided sliding into a second Great Depression, as many people feared.) Is the fact that he seems to be setting in motion a repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" good, or will you only be convinced once it's done?
posted by Jaltcoh at 3:44 AM on February 9, 2010
He's remade the regulatory state. He's signed equal-pay legislation.
Also, things he's "done well" is very subjective. Is his shift in Afghanistan policy good? Were his financial stimulus and bailout good? (Note: we avoided sliding into a second Great Depression, as many people feared.) Is the fact that he seems to be setting in motion a repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" good, or will you only be convinced once it's done?
posted by Jaltcoh at 3:44 AM on February 9, 2010
He made it very clear that one man cannot change a corrupted political system, regardless what anyone says.
And very clear is also, that the media are now only blaming him he isn't as great as they've pictured him to be.
posted by ijsbrand at 4:05 AM on February 9, 2010
And very clear is also, that the media are now only blaming him he isn't as great as they've pictured him to be.
posted by ijsbrand at 4:05 AM on February 9, 2010
Here's an article listing his major accomplishments. Here's another one from the Christian Science monitor. As pointed out, good is subjective.
Some of the big ones are:
Passing the stimulus bill. It's hard to judge what the effects of this bill were, but given the apocalyptic predictions a year ago, it's easy to imagine things being much, much worse than they turned out to be.
Expanded SCHIP to cover millions of uninsured children.
Passed major credit card reform.
Reversed Bush's aggressive fight against marijuana for medical use, as well as reversing his ban on stem cell research and effective family planning initiatives in Africa.
Increased America's "soft power" in the world.
Most of his accomplishments were not as news grabbing as war, but more at reversing the damage caused by the last president.
posted by justkevin at 4:30 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
Some of the big ones are:
Passing the stimulus bill. It's hard to judge what the effects of this bill were, but given the apocalyptic predictions a year ago, it's easy to imagine things being much, much worse than they turned out to be.
Expanded SCHIP to cover millions of uninsured children.
Passed major credit card reform.
Reversed Bush's aggressive fight against marijuana for medical use, as well as reversing his ban on stem cell research and effective family planning initiatives in Africa.
Increased America's "soft power" in the world.
Most of his accomplishments were not as news grabbing as war, but more at reversing the damage caused by the last president.
posted by justkevin at 4:30 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
Well thanks to him, probably fewer people in the rest of the world still hold on to those warm, cordial feelings for America from the '03 party and the wonderful developments that ensued.
posted by Throw away your common sense and get an afro! at 4:35 AM on February 9, 2010
posted by Throw away your common sense and get an afro! at 4:35 AM on February 9, 2010
he made clove cigarettes illegal, thus making it possible for me to actually quit smoking.
I didn't smoke non-cloves, and thanks to the law, I no longer get the chance to make an occastional tipsy impulse buy on a pack of cloves.
posted by herbplarfegan at 4:44 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
I didn't smoke non-cloves, and thanks to the law, I no longer get the chance to make an occastional tipsy impulse buy on a pack of cloves.
posted by herbplarfegan at 4:44 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
America's relationship with Iran is still a problem but I don't think we're close to Israel launching an attack on the Iranians' nuclear infrastructure. I don't know if I'm mis-reading the political landscape but it seemed to me at the end of the Bush administration we were pretty close to allowing Israel to stage such an attack which would have been just scary dumb. There were even people talking about us attacking Iran but I guess after getting us into two wars there was a limit.
posted by rdr at 5:01 AM on February 9, 2010
posted by rdr at 5:01 AM on February 9, 2010
He is encouraging data-based decision-making which incorporates science as a tool for improving the quality of our actions and how we track results. As these fact-based approaches filter into our culture, perhaps America can stop being such an adolescent as finally GTFU.
posted by carmicha at 5:12 AM on February 9, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by carmicha at 5:12 AM on February 9, 2010 [2 favorites]
Response by poster: Why is his approval rating so low?
posted by Jazzwick at 5:14 AM on February 9, 2010
posted by Jazzwick at 5:14 AM on February 9, 2010
>Why is his approval rating so low?
I'd bet it's two-fold. One, there was a huge amount of hype during his campaign, and people are realizing that he's not the second coming.
Second, I think that his critics have been very effective in transmitting a message that he's bad for the country (at least, to some segments of the population).
Just my two cents.
posted by Gorgik at 5:19 AM on February 9, 2010
I'd bet it's two-fold. One, there was a huge amount of hype during his campaign, and people are realizing that he's not the second coming.
Second, I think that his critics have been very effective in transmitting a message that he's bad for the country (at least, to some segments of the population).
Just my two cents.
posted by Gorgik at 5:19 AM on February 9, 2010
He has, actually, improved my life a little bit. From some time around Clinton's dalliances with ladies in blue dresses I staunchly ignored all national level politics, something difficult to do when living inside the Beltway with a government lawyer for a father. GWB engendered a sort of seething distaste for politics, current events, and my own country, as opposed to the more feminist-minded annoyance I felt with Clinton. I refused to follow current history to the point where I honestly wasn't clear on the difference between Iran and Iraq or what the deal with health care was or why anybody cared about illegal immigrants, because the people in power made everything so incredibly unwatchable. I felt uncomfortable watching pundits or people who I also had no reason to trust make up opinions for me, I had zero desire to read articles or educate myself, apart from a small wish to figure out how to get the hell out of my own country.
But Obama being president has actually changed that. Some time about a year into his campaign I got interested in current events. I found him someone I could listen to and watch, someone who spoke in a way that didn't make me seethe with rage, and the people who surrounded him seemed to genuinely hold and interest in things that I had entirely written off. It was, and still is, at least a little bit contagious.
I certainly don't agree with him on plenty of levels, but I can sit and watch Obama make a speech, watching an unedited feed, and come away with a vested interest in my own country and more knowledge than I had before. Now that I know Obama will be quoted, I can read the news and not want to tear it apart, most of the time, because at least the quote will be grammatically sensible. Because I wanted to be sure I wasn't being swept away by charisma, I decided to educate myself about the things I had so stubbornly ignored, so I could make my own informed decisions. Although some of this may have come with age, and the crushing boredom of a liberal arts degree, I'm certain that a lot of this has to do with Obama being president.
This doesn't seem like it's what you're asking about, but you did ask if he's improved my life in any way, and he has. He's caused a bloom of socio-political understanding in me, by sheer force of eloquence.
posted by Mizu at 5:20 AM on February 9, 2010
But Obama being president has actually changed that. Some time about a year into his campaign I got interested in current events. I found him someone I could listen to and watch, someone who spoke in a way that didn't make me seethe with rage, and the people who surrounded him seemed to genuinely hold and interest in things that I had entirely written off. It was, and still is, at least a little bit contagious.
I certainly don't agree with him on plenty of levels, but I can sit and watch Obama make a speech, watching an unedited feed, and come away with a vested interest in my own country and more knowledge than I had before. Now that I know Obama will be quoted, I can read the news and not want to tear it apart, most of the time, because at least the quote will be grammatically sensible. Because I wanted to be sure I wasn't being swept away by charisma, I decided to educate myself about the things I had so stubbornly ignored, so I could make my own informed decisions. Although some of this may have come with age, and the crushing boredom of a liberal arts degree, I'm certain that a lot of this has to do with Obama being president.
This doesn't seem like it's what you're asking about, but you did ask if he's improved my life in any way, and he has. He's caused a bloom of socio-political understanding in me, by sheer force of eloquence.
posted by Mizu at 5:20 AM on February 9, 2010
Why is his approval rating so low?
Because he's fallen short on some of his promises and a lot of the people that got him elected don't understand that political changes as big as the ones he promised take longer than a single year and they've become disillusioned with him. Hell, some things may take longer than a single term. (Yes we still can!)
I think carmicha's answer is one of the best here so far. It's important that he's basing decisions on hard evidence and not what "God" told him to do. Even if he does believe in God, making decisions based on real-world evidence is important and he seems to have that down.
posted by InsanePenguin at 5:20 AM on February 9, 2010
Because he's fallen short on some of his promises and a lot of the people that got him elected don't understand that political changes as big as the ones he promised take longer than a single year and they've become disillusioned with him. Hell, some things may take longer than a single term. (Yes we still can!)
I think carmicha's answer is one of the best here so far. It's important that he's basing decisions on hard evidence and not what "God" told him to do. Even if he does believe in God, making decisions based on real-world evidence is important and he seems to have that down.
posted by InsanePenguin at 5:20 AM on February 9, 2010
Why is his approval rating so low?
Because the economy is shit and that's never good for the incumbent.
Here's something on how he's improved public schooling.
posted by creasy boy at 5:31 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
Because the economy is shit and that's never good for the incumbent.
Here's something on how he's improved public schooling.
posted by creasy boy at 5:31 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
"Why is his approval rating so low?"
As President Obama recently remarked:
Unfortunately, the ship of state turns very slowly and the president has meager Constitutional powers. He is heavily reliant upon the congress to actually implement his policy intentions and they've been doing their standard "not very much" for as long as I can remember. A simple example of this is the approach to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" gays in the military policy. It is my understanding that as commander in chief of the armed forces he could just declare this policy ended which could be as easily reversed by the next person in office. Getting the congressional imprimatur would mean a) the policy change fits with the People as a whole and b) it would be more resistant to future change. By trying to achieve consensus, this pledge will be hard won if it is won, nevertheless I believe it is the right way to attempt it.
Herbert Hoover campaigned on the pledge of national prosperity "A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage" in 1928. Nine months after he took office, the Great Depression "officially" began. Hoover did very, very poorly in the next election.
Making the rest of the world view the US as no longer a clown with bloody fangs is the most significant
posted by fydfyd at 5:50 AM on February 9, 2010
As President Obama recently remarked:
"One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by a severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression."and his campaign rhetoric implied that he'd be able to fix it all.
Unfortunately, the ship of state turns very slowly and the president has meager Constitutional powers. He is heavily reliant upon the congress to actually implement his policy intentions and they've been doing their standard "not very much" for as long as I can remember. A simple example of this is the approach to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" gays in the military policy. It is my understanding that as commander in chief of the armed forces he could just declare this policy ended which could be as easily reversed by the next person in office. Getting the congressional imprimatur would mean a) the policy change fits with the People as a whole and b) it would be more resistant to future change. By trying to achieve consensus, this pledge will be hard won if it is won, nevertheless I believe it is the right way to attempt it.
Herbert Hoover campaigned on the pledge of national prosperity "A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage" in 1928. Nine months after he took office, the Great Depression "officially" began. Hoover did very, very poorly in the next election.
Making the rest of the world view the US as no longer a clown with bloody fangs is the most significant
posted by fydfyd at 5:50 AM on February 9, 2010
The election was a major historical event. Approval ratings get funky around then. GWB had over 90% approval at 9/11, and nicely managed to shave that down to about 20% by the time he left. So far he seems to be doing quite well compared to some of his predecessors.
posted by Throw away your common sense and get an afro! at 5:58 AM on February 9, 2010
posted by Throw away your common sense and get an afro! at 5:58 AM on February 9, 2010
Why is his approval rating so low?
Because his message of hope and change built totally unrealistic expectations. The voters don't understand how little power the President has. Laws get written by our directly elected representatives, not the President. Normally that's a good thing, but Congress (and mostly just the Senate) has been broken for a few decades now.
The President is really just the administrative branch of government, a figurehead and the guy with the army. He's done a pretty good job if you consider just that core function. People around the world hate us less, we're doing as well as you could hope on the war front, there's been less fear mongering from the government, some of the more egregious policies of the Bush admin have been rolled back, regulatory bodies like the EPA and FDA aren't under quite as much control by industry assholes, etc.
What he HASN'T done is make good use of his bully pulpit to encourage/shame Congress into action. It's not Bush or Clinton really did much better, though. And, I think everyone can agree that the Republican representatives unquestionably make it harder for Dems to get things done than vice versa.
posted by paanta at 6:00 AM on February 9, 2010
Because his message of hope and change built totally unrealistic expectations. The voters don't understand how little power the President has. Laws get written by our directly elected representatives, not the President. Normally that's a good thing, but Congress (and mostly just the Senate) has been broken for a few decades now.
The President is really just the administrative branch of government, a figurehead and the guy with the army. He's done a pretty good job if you consider just that core function. People around the world hate us less, we're doing as well as you could hope on the war front, there's been less fear mongering from the government, some of the more egregious policies of the Bush admin have been rolled back, regulatory bodies like the EPA and FDA aren't under quite as much control by industry assholes, etc.
What he HASN'T done is make good use of his bully pulpit to encourage/shame Congress into action. It's not Bush or Clinton really did much better, though. And, I think everyone can agree that the Republican representatives unquestionably make it harder for Dems to get things done than vice versa.
posted by paanta at 6:00 AM on February 9, 2010
@ ijsbrand
That is an extremely subjective opinion, if not a blatantly false statement. You are attributing ideals to him that he may or may not have. Remember, this is a man that got elected the first time by having his opponents disqualified from running, so he ran unopposed.
This whole discussion belongs in chat-filter.
posted by thekiltedwonder at 6:00 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
That is an extremely subjective opinion, if not a blatantly false statement. You are attributing ideals to him that he may or may not have. Remember, this is a man that got elected the first time by having his opponents disqualified from running, so he ran unopposed.
This whole discussion belongs in chat-filter.
posted by thekiltedwonder at 6:00 AM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
His approval rating is not low.
He hasn't done anything particularly well because his politics and those he surrounds himself with are awful. He won an election on the progressive dreams of the vast majority of Americans, and handed us Clintonesque Republican lite bullshit.
Its not particularly surprising; Obama's money comes from corporations, oil, and big pharma. As usual, the Democrats trade on people's hope to gain power. Same as Republicans, just a slightly different demographic utilized.
posted by RajahKing at 6:05 AM on February 9, 2010
He hasn't done anything particularly well because his politics and those he surrounds himself with are awful. He won an election on the progressive dreams of the vast majority of Americans, and handed us Clintonesque Republican lite bullshit.
Its not particularly surprising; Obama's money comes from corporations, oil, and big pharma. As usual, the Democrats trade on people's hope to gain power. Same as Republicans, just a slightly different demographic utilized.
posted by RajahKing at 6:05 AM on February 9, 2010
« Older What to do with "fun-stuff-only" donation for... | My macbook is taking pictures of me, I want it to... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Jazzwick at 3:17 AM on February 9, 2010