Grade Obama

[merithyn]

I gave him a B, but I really wanted to give him a B-.

I think the Healthcare Reform, however watered down, has some of the best necessary medical reform we've seen in ages. I love that he's supportive of gay marriage now, but it detracts that he waited so long to do so. I think his handling of the recession was very well-done, and the fact that the US never really lost control unlike some other nations is a credit to his policy. His foreign-policy has been, in my opinion, pretty spot on. The economy and healthcare reform are the two that push him up from a C to a B-, in my mind.

He's been abysmal at dealing with Congress, however. That's partly due to the Republican line of doing whatever they can to thwart him, but I think in order to be a good, effective President, one has to be able to deal with that and still get shit done. Obama has not. I appreciate that he's killed Osama, got us out of Iraq, and is getting us out of Afghanistan, but I'm disgusted with his handling of immigration reform (or lack of handling). And the reality is that we were going to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan no matter who was President. We can't afford to stay, financially or otherwise. And his complete lack of response and guidance regarding women's issues as they are destroyed one state at a time is infuriating.

He made a lot of promises that he didn't keep, but that happens since he doesn't rule in a vacuum. In the end, he held us together during a massive, world-wide recession, he openly supports legal rights for all, and his healthcare reform puts us on the right footing for safe, affordable healthcare for everyone.

[derspiess]

<barf>

[Sheilbh]

No kidding.  Probably gives Bush a B+.

I'd give Bush an A for 2006-08. I think the surge is hugely overrated, but it was one of few options available to the US and well-executed, plus his response to financial crisis was exactly what was needed (unlike that of most of his party).

But then I think 2002-06 were disastrous.

[CountDeMoney]

Social policy: a solid C, gets points for gay marriage, is not deducted for gun control as that was a Quixotic crusade in the first place and everybody knows it wasn't going to happen anyway, but is deducted points for not addressing voter registration and suppression issues like he said he would Election Night.

Economic policy: a weak C for pushing Obamacare and rescuing the American auto industry that everybody seems to hate because there's a union involved, but loses points for not only not kicking Wall Street in the fucking nutsack enough, but giving them even more power to avoid accountability as well as not taxing Yi's rich friends and their corporations enough.  Doesn't lose points for sequestration, because there was no way Congress was going to let him dodge it to begin with.

Foreign policy: Solid B for droning the living shit out of everybody in a turban, making the strategic pivot to the Pacific and actively pursuing a collective security environment against China, letting the Euros do the heavy lifting with Libya, a progressive approach to nuclear reduction, Stuxnet, keeping things as opaque as possible regarding Iran and at least trying to get the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative off the ground.  Loses points for having an incredibly poor public relations platform that even Hillary couldn't overcome.

Overall: C.  His administration certainly has its weaknesses as does the man himself, who seems a bit too deliberate and professorial at times which gives the impression of distance and an ineffective aloofness, but that's eclipsed by a Congress that hasn't been this hostile and obstructionist against a President for no other reason than pure hatred since the Civil War.

[garbon]

In the end, he held us together during a massive, world-wide recession, he openly supports legal rights for all, and his healthcare reform puts us on the right footing for safe, affordable healthcare for everyone.

Held us together? I'm not sure we were in danger of a civil war...and hard to say that partisan strife is at a low end. So, care to explain?

[Jacob]

In the end, he held us together during a massive, world-wide recession, he openly supports legal rights for all, and his healthcare reform puts us on the right footing for safe, affordable healthcare for everyone.

Held us together? I'm not sure we were in danger of a civil war...and hard to say that partisan strife is at a low end. So, care to explain?

I think she means economically.

[CountDeMoney]

I think she means economically.

Certainly not racially, what with all these creepy ass crackers hating on the man.

[OttoVonBismarck]

C, but that is an upgrade from a D because I figure he has an exceptionally difficult job because the Republicans are being such complete and utter douchebags. On the other hand, he has completely and utterly failed to handle them being complete and utter douchebags.

I basically agree but leaned slightly D because some prominent failures that were basically entirely his come to the front of my mind. He's really bungled most of his major foreign policy initiatives, for example. That's actually something almost entirely under Presidential control. I also think his response to a growing axis of anti-American countries that are increasingly working together (Iran, Russia, the Western Hemisphere Loser-countries) has been extremely ineffective.

I read an article a few years ago in Foreign Policy about how a President should most fairly be judged based on what he does with foreign policy, civil rights, and the military because those three things a President has a great deal of power totally unrestricted by legislative checks. (Ex. Truman desegregating the military, Teddy inviting blacks to dinner and appointing them to civil service posts, Nixon's detente with China etc.) On some issues like Guantanamo, the unique legal situation meant Obama really couldn't do much, but on lots of other areas he's done little to roll back Bush era excesses. [I should note I take the view that Presidents like Lincoln, FDR, Bush who serve during crisis times have validly encroached on liberties but we've always claimed them back, something that hasn't happened this time.]

So on foreign policy and rights I give Obama a D- and an F respectively. On military I grade him fairly highly, he showed poor decision making in his early thinking on how to end our involvement with Afghanistan but his trimming of the military has been wise and mostly well directed and his decision to use extensive drone bombing campaigns has delivered amazing results.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Outside of foreign policy, rights, and the military I give Obama mixed reviews but don't weight them heavily in my consideration of his Presidency. Mostly because I'm not sure any Democratic President should take much blame for this crop of Republicans in the House, and on issues like the economy and domestic policy I correctly understand the power of the Presidency is substantially more limited than most people believe. Plus he's had some good domestic policy initiatives that have gotten implemented.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I see foreign policy a lot differently than you guys. I see a growing axis of countries working against our interests that Obama has done nothing to circumvent. Throughout Latin America, to Russia, to Iran. He has in my opinion walked on the razor's edge mostly via indecision with the Arab Spring and we could ultimately see disaster there depending on how Syria and Egypt turn out.

Our relationship with China has maybe gotten a bit 'closer' but China now pushes us around more and wields more power relative to us, China has also expanded its reach throughout parts of the developing world where America has little influence. We've done very little to counter Chinese bullying all around its sphere of influence and have mostly abandoned traditional allies like Japan which now will most likely pursue ultimately full remilitarization and perhaps even nuclearization some day. Taiwan is well aware that it has no friends in America any longer and is going to increasingly come under the Chinese thumb.

One of the most effective foreign policy shifts an American President could make would be to totally divorce ourselves from Pakistan and embrace India. India is unfairly a pseudo-pariah state because it developed nuclear weapons and the United States developed close ties with Pakistan. Despite all the raping going on there, India is actually a country that shares more of our cultural and political values than China. Further, China is too close to us to do anything bad with our relationship if we move closer with India. We should be developing greater working relationships and investment in the subcontinent and that is our best way to build a stronger sphere of influence relative to the Chinese and Russians.

[merithyn]

In the end, he held us together during a massive, world-wide recession, he openly supports legal rights for all, and his healthcare reform puts us on the right footing for safe, affordable healthcare for everyone.

Held us together? I'm not sure we were in danger of a civil war...and hard to say that partisan strife is at a low end. So, care to explain?

I think she means economically.

As I stated earlier in the post, I think his policy did a lot to keep us from tanking along with a number of other countries, which arguably kept the economy stronger across the board than it could have been.

In other words, he didn't pull a Hoover.

[Sheilbh]

Our relationship with China has maybe gotten a bit 'closer' but China now pushes us around more and wields more power relative to us, China has also expanded its reach throughout parts of the developing world where America has little influence. We've done very little to counter Chinese bullying all around its sphere of influence and have mostly abandoned traditional allies like Japan which now will most likely pursue ultimately full remilitarization and perhaps even nuclearization some day. Taiwan is well aware that it has no friends in America any longer and is going to increasingly come under the Chinese thumb.

I disagree with almost all of your stuff on foreign policy - I think Iran's significantly weaker both regionally and internationally, Russia's Russia and the Latin American misfits don't seem to have any momentum (though that's due to what's going on there Obama, like Bush, seems to entirely lack a Latin American policy). There are lots of things you describe that were present when Obama took office. What matters is whether they're stronger or weaker, which way the momentum is going and why. On that count I think Obama's been successful.

But this bit strikes me as really inaccurate. Obama himself toured the region, but so did Clinton, Gates and Panetta hoovering up new cooperation deals with countries like Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia. A few concrete examples are basing a fleet in Singapore, training exercises and cooperation with Indonesia and joint exercises with the Philippines. In addition there's all of the arms deals going on which on the one hand can confront current problems like terrorism and piracy, but will also affect Chinese calculations in the region.

In Asia I think Obama's, wisely, expanded American influence and friends to counter China. To an extent he's played catchup because for a long time American policy in Asia was Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and China, but as I say I think he's expanded the picture to include new relationships rather than just dumped the old allies. Add into that the goal to create a trade deal with ASEAN and I think it's a solid approach. Of course he's been helped quite significantly by a lot of Chinese overreach.

I think Asia's probably his biggest area of success, not surprisingly given that it's one of the relatively few areas (terrorism's another) where there seems to be a clear strategy.

[CountDeMoney]

But this bit strikes me as really inaccurate. Obama himself toured the region, but so did Clinton, Gates and Panetta hoovering up new cooperation deals with countries like Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia. A few concrete examples are basing a fleet in Singapore, training exercises and cooperation with Indonesia and joint exercises with the Philippines. In addition there's all of the arms deals going on which on the one hand can confront current problems like terrorism and piracy, but will also affect Chinese calculations in the region.

In Asia I think Obama's, wisely, expanded American influence and friends to counter China. To an extent he's played catchup because for a long time American policy in Asia was Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and China, but as I say I think he's expanded the picture to include new relationships rather than just dumped the old allies. Add into that the goal to create a trade deal with ASEAN and I think it's a solid approach. Of course he's been helped quite significantly by a lot of Chinese overreach.

I think Asia's probably his biggest area of success, not surprisingly given that it's one of the relatively few areas (terrorism's another) where there seems to be a clear strategy.

Yeah, I think Otto's a bit off the mark regarding the Pacific as well.  The Obama Administration has been very on point and very specific in regards to strengthening both the individual relationships with its allies and in developing a layered and interlocking security based not only on defense but economic arrangements in the region as a whole.

Though I do agree with Otto's opinion on increasing our cooperation with India as a natural and historic foil to China and, after the US-Japan axis, they also happen to be the PRC's greatest concern for the future in their strategic framework.  Shame his own party doesn't agree.

[derspiess]

Shame his own party doesn't agree.

How's that?

[11B4V]

D