XtremeSpeakFreely

President Barack Obama, who rocketed to the White House promising "change you can believe in," is now telling voters they shouldn't change a thing.

His message for the fall elections, which are looking ominous for his Democrats, is that Republicans caused the nation's economic troubles, but he and the Democrats are starting to fix them. So stick with the Democrats and don't go back to the GOP.

"This is a choice between the policies that led us into the mess or the policies that are leading out of the mess," Obama said recently in Las Vegas.

Trouble is, it's a tough sell to voters who've seen little progress.

Unemployment is stuck near double digits and polls show many voters have decided Obama's policies are to blame, not his predecessor's.

Obama often frames the argument by saying that Republicans had their chance to drive, then drove the car into a ditch and shouldn't get the keys back. But voters may be concluding that Democrats, who control the White House and both chambers of Congress, have had their chance at the wheel, too, and haven't gotten very far.

"From the American public's point of view, the people in charge at this point are the people who own the problem," said Andrew Kohut, head of the nonpartisan Pew Research Center.

Obama's challenge for the next four months is to turn that perception around.

So he's traveled, from Buffalo, N.Y., to San Francisco, reminding voters of the mess he faced when he took office: a shrinking economy, lost jobs, weak markets, an economic crisis becoming international in scope.

Now, even though unemployment hasn't dropped to the 8 percent level the administration once projected, the economy is gradually picking up and adding jobs, the president says. Putting Republicans in power, he contends, would reverse the momentum.

But the White House knows it can't just be about blaming George W. Bush, though the former president's enduring unpopularity helps Obama's case. Obama must try to take it a step further and get voters to view Republicans now running for office as little more than extensions of Bush who would advance the ex-president's same policies.

"This isn't about relitigating history," said Obama senior adviser David Axelrod. "This is about history repeating itself."

Will the strategy work in an election year roiling with anti-incumbent sentiment? That's not yet clear, though it hasn't appeared to boost Democrats' standing much so far. Midterm elections typically deal a drubbing to the president's party anyway, and for Democrats it could mean losing control of the House.

Republicans say they intend to keep the focus on Obama's policies, which they cast as deficit-busting, big-government boondoggles. "Democrats can attempt to spin it any way they want, but unfortunately for them this election is going to be a referendum on the president and his party's failed economic policies," said Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee.

But Obama's pickings were slim when it came to campaign themes.

The narrative that worked so well when Obama was a presidential candidate offering himself as a transformational figure who could change Washington is no longer at his disposal. He can hardly claim to have delivered on that promise because he hasn't changed Washington, at least not much, as he's acknowledged.

Obama's stacked up a remarkable, if controversial, string of legislative successes, from last year's economic stimulus bill to the health care law and now the financial overhaul bill. But his vaunted eloquence on the campaign trail has often seemed to desert him as he's tried to sell those policies to the public. To the 14.6 million people out of work nothing else much matters anyway.

At the same time, the desire for change that Obama helped ignite is still burning. But this time it may work against him. As Bush recognized shortly before leaving office, calling for change is a luxury denied to incumbents...

Wouldn't you say he inherited the worst financial crisis since 1929?

Obviously. And Clinton created the best economy we've seen in decades AND gave us a budget surplus!

Wouldn't you say he inherited the worst financial crisis since 1929?

He is the worst financial crisis since 1929.

Again you applying this so-called "crisis" to a single person. Obama is just a puppet. Just like Bush was. He's not the decision maker. This crisis and all the other crisis in 19th and 20th century were artificially constructed.
Now people have yet another thing to fear so they work they asses off instead of holding their breath and looking at the picture from bird's height. They simply don't have time nor will for this. They keep hoping that this new guy will make the difference. No he will not and he's not put there to make one. Populous still stuck at political concepts when all the power is way above this shyte you call elections.

As for Clinton being responsible for greatest economical growth in US - it's just another bunch of bull. While US was "raising" in economy entire eastern europe was paying for it plus some other colonies under US corporations added to the basket of American consumer goodies.

Pay attention, I've said many times that when we say obama, we mean everyone with their hand up his ass.

Pay attention, I've said many times that when we say obama, we mean everyone with their hand up his ass.

The clinton thing was sarcasm.

Wouldn't you say he inherited the worst financial crisis since 1929? This is what he gets for going with a measly stimulus package.

Obviously he didn't learn enough from the history books. Meanwhile, China's stimulus package was 13% of GDP vs. 4.9% of GDP in the US. Hmm, has anyone looked at China recently? Or how about Japan? They had a large stimulus package as well and growing at a brisk 5% vs. our sluggish 2.5% for the first half of 2010. Their stimulus package was about 10% of GDP. Are you starting to see a pattern? Oh, and I can GUARANTEE you they pay lower interest on their debt than Ireland.

Wouldn't you say he inherited the worst financial crisis since 1929? This is what he gets for going with a measly stimulus package.

Obviously he didn't learn enough from the history books. Meanwhile, China's stimulus package was 13% of GDP vs. 4.9% of GDP in the US. Hmm, has anyone looked at China recently? Or how about Japan? They had a large stimulus package as well and growing at a brisk 5% vs. our sluggish 2.5% for the first half of 2010. Their stimulus package was about 10% of GDP. Are you starting to see a pattern? Oh, and I can GUARANTEE you they pay lower interest on their debt than Ireland.

Guess what Jon.. Japans 5% is not sustainable: fact. Its very much driven by domestic subsidies for cars and such. That stimulus train is coming off the rails very soon too. Chinas second half is looking like a slowdown also.

And I said this before.. you spend too much time concentrating on cost of bond insurance instead looking at the big picture. Just like the Bloomberg guys that said everything was great on the eve of the crash.

So essentially you agree with Cooper that Obama's defeat in the next election won't mean much since the hand up his butt will simply go into the next puppet?

What is Ireland's unemployment rate? Approaching 14% Japan: 5%. Japan's interest as % of GDP: 2. Yeah, they are heading for a cliff.

Srsly.. that 5% growth is well on its way to been evaporated as we speak. Its stimulus fluff that is going to evaporate.

And while private money is still kept tight because of insecurity in the market caused by the very same stimulii, you're gonna see the double dip.

Its as clear as day now. Japans interest .. but they can't get the banks to lend to their domestic consumers. LOL Wonder why?