the POTUS town meetings in Indiana and Florida this past week?
Is he appealing to we the people as if we the people could make something happen?

Perhaps the regimine of the WH is so tasking to him he had to get out and get back in his campaign mode. Words...word...word...WORDS!!!

When one ventures a speculative guess about the learning curve for the office of POTUS, one can only wonder how the priority was placed on "stumping"...AGAIN...versus tending to the pressing needs of his new office.

In my humble opinion, for an executive on a steep learning curve it was a poor choice of how and where to spend his time. That opinion is based on executive experience in time management. If he wanted to spend his time effectively (not a political usual circumstance!) he might rather get back to the congress and senate that he needs to give more specific direction to regarding accomplishing his campaign promises. He is currently in the mode of rationalizing for us why the way they are doing it is OK...even if not perfect. PERFECT? Not even close.....same-o same-o.

He has yet to take on the system that has failed to meet the expectation of any....ANY...POTUS of the last 50 years. Only MOS (more of the same).

Anyway, why do you think he was out stumping instead of home working??

BTK

He is trying to SELL the plan from his bully pulpit. I agree with you he was hired to do a job and he should be working not campaigning.

I think he is doing two things. One, he is rallying people to back this package, possibly by putting pressure on the incumbents in their states. And two, he is actually showing people in these troubled areas that he cares, he's there for them, he hears their voices. He's accessible. Something we haven't seen in many years. i.e. Katrina.

"Never take a person's hope away ... It might be all they have."

Give this man a break! Three weeks and he hasn't solved the world's woes yet! Shocking!

It's always interesting to hear the differences in the interpretation of things like the President communicating with the people, depending on whether or not those with an opinion one way or the other supported the President for election or didn't.

I am not a dedicated Democrat, having voted for the presidential candidate of that party only twice in my life, in the last two elections. Among other things, I was impressed with Barack Obama's demonstrated intelligence and education. I was a bit concerned over his inexperience, but I have been more than pleased with the speed with which he has staffed his administration with experienced and qualified people. Is he on a learning curve? Absolutlely, just as any first-term President might be.

What has been more pleasing to me has been his willingness and ability to speak frequently to the American public, explaining complex situations, how he reached the plans his admnistration has adopted to deal with them, and answering questions they might have. During the period between the election and his inauguration, he had a press conference almost every day, it seemed. He was addressing the problems facing the country, while the sitting President was almost completely silent on any issue until a press conference at the very end of his term which was mostly designed to fluff up his legacy as President and certainly did not address any problem or issue, even peripherally.

So now we have the President out "stumping", as you call it, encouraging Americans who are experiencing the brunt of the financial problems we're facing to support the stimulus plan by contacting their elected representatives, and also answering and explaining questions that the public has regarding the plan. He made two speeches in two of the cities in America that have the highest unemployment rates and who might likely benefit most from economic stimulus. Using Air Force 1, I'd guess that he was able to accomplish both speeches in less than a half day for each, including travel time. Frankly, I find it refreshing that we have a President who is both willing and able to explain issues facing the country, even complex ones, in a way that can be understood by everyone. It might have been best described by a close friend of mine, a lifelong Republican and what I would describe as a far-right conservative who said to me, "...how pleasant it was to listen to a president string together more than 5 words in a sentence, think on his feet and generally handle himself in a news conference without too much smirking and mispronunciation of simple words and confusion of ideas."

Like I said, the differences in interpretation of the same set of facts is interesting.

others thought about a specific instance. It had nothing to do with any expectation of anything being done in three weeks...the query had nothing to do with accomplishment.
It is just possible that a question, from time to time, is asked, that does not warrant triggering a defensive response.

BTK

Originally Posted by chelsea24

I think he is doing two things. One, he is rallying people to back this package, possibly by putting pressure on the incumbents in their states. And two, he is actually showing people in these troubled areas that he cares, he's there for them, he hears their voices. He's accessible. Something we haven't seen in many years. i.e. Katrina.

"Never take a person's hope away ... It might be all they have."

Give this man a break! Three weeks and he hasn't solved the world's woes yet! Shocking!

I think u answered the question well; succinctly, and honestly chels.:

I'm not sure Pres. Obama is listening, but instead is lecturing.

The polls are conflicting on the stimulus. Rasmussen says stimulus support is less than 40%, and Gallup's numbers are the reverse of Rasmussen.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ge_falls_to_37
http://www.gallup.com/poll/114184/Pu...Unchanged.aspx

I have no problem of Pres. Obama being on constant travel around the nation, as all Presidents have done similar stumping. However, there was no Presidential discussion about how funding ACORN and other pork is going to help Elkhart, Indiana workers and the like. I hope it doesn't turn out to be exploiting vulnerable people's situation to reward party campaigners.

ahhh SteveZ ...... The eternal optimist!

first of all, having lived thru more than a few DC Februaries, I don't blame Obama for heading out, esp to SW Fla. Can't understand cold, snowy Elkhart, however. That was probably supposed to be Biloxi and some staffer is going to join the unemployed.

This was a lecture tour, however. Obama is out to convince the public that the Reid/Pelosi bill, not the Obama bill, is a wonderful piece of bipartisan workmanship. I would love to believe that the White House got tubed by the Senate and House radicals and that Obama himself would have pushed a more centrist approach. But it ain't gonna happen. Dirty Harry and Pelosi got almost everything they wanted (evidently) and we all (the public and Obama) going to have to live with.

And sorry Chels, but Obama won't be able to carry off true caring until he can master the Bill Clinton single tear running down his cheek. Oh, & thanx for kinda defending me in another thread earlier. I was flabbergasted and it took a while to recover.

OT: when does one use "a while" as opposed to "awhile"?


`

Originally Posted by chelsea24

ahhh SteveZ ...... The eternal optimist!

More the eternal pragmatist. You can laugh all you want, all the way to the poorhouse, in dreaming that Mr. Obama is the national savior and that hiding ACORN funding and a slew of other things into a bill advertised as saving desperate people from desperate situations as "change we can believe in."

Snowjobs are snowjobs, no matter which party or candidate or incumbent spreads the snow.

The eternal optimists are those who believe against the obvious that a media-endorsed version of Professor Harold Hill can "save us all." The only person who can make your life better is you yourself - not some politician skilled in public salesmanship.

So far, the only thing I see coming out of this stimulus bill is more money out of my pocket to fund special interests which are owed political payback by the Democratic Party and the President.

Please explain in a rational basis where I'm wrong. I actually hope that I am, but facts - rather than rose-colored glasses optimism - is what's needed.