Politics Obama - Actually doing a good job?

Frankly...I wonder how much of this was a mistake in managment not advertising or making aware the ACA
And how much was blocked by opponents through reverse negative ads/opinion?
And how much was blocked by lack of appropriate funding??

All of the above?
I think there is blame to all around...

 

Is Obama going to start pulling a Lincoln?
Making executive orders to make things happen against an intransigent and ineffective Congress...

He certainly has a good opposition which seems to have a bad habit of sticking their foot in their mouths.
But the question is, will it work? And will there be backlash from the Congress...or will his Dem allies shield/buffer him?

The Supreme Court might have something to say about it...they are already putting their own 2-cents in on the recess appointments.

 

Well, since most federal contractors get more than this...it's more likely a symbolic gesture.
Something to refer to during the State of the Union Address...and give the Dems something to cheer or leverage...and perhaps coax the GOP in allowing a overall min wage raise.

And the real reason he can't do anything of real impact...the prez doesn't have that power, only the Congress.
The prez can only alter what the govt staff can do, as the Chief Executive...but not the rest of the nation.
But I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you don't know...

I guess there's some that he might be able to do if given emergency powers, like Lincoln had...but not in the normal scheme of things.
I'll be interested to know what he can get away with.

In the end, it's what Congress and the SCOTUS let him do.
But anything that does, may become precedent.

The Founding Fathers put most of the power in the Congress...they were worried about presidents ending up being like Kings. (especially Jefferson)
It's only after a few presidents that the office gained in power...but it's not in the Constitution.

 

So...how did everyone like the State of the Union address??

The "standard" Obama speech...which was well done, but not inspiring like his early pre-president ones.

A whole list of items to act on, many of which won't be done. (which is fairly typical, no matter who's prez)

He was a bit less, let's hold hands...and more, if you don't act, I'll do it myself.
Giving Congress some "words", asking them to basically get their act together.

Question is again, what he can get away with, if doing it himself?
Or what he can get through...will Congress play ball or not?

I'd say, we'll see the tone this spring.
But there does seem to be a bit of a thaw recently.

I did love the push for Infrastructure.
And this would be a win-win for Congress.
They can say they got something done, it starts projects/jobs...and reps can say they gave back to their constituents and own areas.

I like the idea of tax reform, but I doubt we'll get this done anytime soon. (it would be nice to write off commuting costs, like businesses write off anything work related)
Love the idea of removal of subsidies...we don't need to be paying profitable companies...again, with lobbying, this won't happen though.
Want the patent reform...but again, I doubt they'll do this anytime soon. (but this he might be able to affect through protocol orders himself)

I could care less about nothing the First Lady and all the guests. (except the wounded soldier, that was a nice touch)
Otherwise, it's a waste of time (one that all of them do since Reagan)

The words on Energy were worthless, the state of our energy is a gimme, it's going to happen no matter what...the US and Canada hit the lottery.
The energy companies will attempt to profit, no matter what...what he CAN do is make sure they aren't inflating the price by manipulation or speculation. (he is the top cop)

I think the words on education is also moot. The education system is changing quickly.
More teaching done online, the localities will start to reduce school infrastructure and staff. Too much overhead, the politics and budget will push this.
Although, he could attempt to get colleges to reduce their fees...but this is private, so it's unlikely.

Unemployment will solve itself...as the economy gets better, this spring should be different,
and the GOP will likely allow the extensions, to save face and not look cruel.

 

It works well for some students, works terribly for others. It's hard for many students to get what they need from a machine. Going through a tutorial works for some, but not for others; many students need a real person to assist them. Lev Vygotsky referred to this process as "scaffolding"--essentially, a more learned peer (in this case, a teacher or a more experienced student) helps the learner to reach what's called the "zone of proximal development." In the ZPD, a student achieves more than what they could achieve on their own--it takes them to the next level. Computers cannot provide this kind of scaffolding yet, as it requires more feedback than currently exists. It is quite the process, and one that took me, as a teacher, a long time to learn how to do effectively. Now I'm very good at it.

The education system is NOT changing quickly, @rogue49. It never does. It may appear to be a monolithic bureaucracy on one hand, but it isn't, at all. The education system in the United States is made up of millions of moving parts, consisting of localities that are used to having independence from the federal government to some extent. We're on the verge of a major pushback against Common Core. We don't have the money to push learning online as it is; Pearson is doing its level best to make it more appealing, and that's frankly one reason we shouldn't push learning online--the only entity that really profits when we do is Pearson (Pearson - Always Learning). Students and teachers lose. One thing that WILL change in the next couple years is Baby Boomer teachers retiring--and they're all at the top of the payscale. It will help to free up cash to hire more teachers and improve our infrastructure within the schools (which desperately needs to be done). I'm seeing this play out already.

Education is one of those things where everyone has an opinion because they went to school or sent kids to school--however, I've found that their opinions are more often wrong than not. I say this as someone who is in a public school nearly every day, in different roles and in different schools, so I get to see how all of these things handed down from the feds and the state play out in different localities.

 

This is a debate for I've been having for years with my cousin, who's a HS math teacher and much of the rest of my family who are also HS teachers.
I'm not at all arguing it's merits from a scholastic or learning context...I agree fully that in-person teaching is superior for the most part.

I'm talking about it in pure political, financial and Machiavellian terms...
The powers that be, the politicians and accountants, who are non-teachers are likely forcing this slow drive and paradigm shift.
To put it simply...they are cheap.

They consider the maintenance of the infrastructure, the support of all school staff...and all the headaches that go with it, not a thing they want to deal with.
If they could remove it, they would. And if you get them to be honest, they'll say as such. Or if you been watching the local govt trends, you'll see they're going that way.
Reducing and removing pensions...the same with staff. Closing/merging schools and so on...

Online education is slowly allowing this...and they are on a push to make it happen.
And my cousin, finally saw the light...got a a Masters in Education, emphasizing online instructional design and development
....and his school district is about to convert him from teaching into Project Mgr/SME for online education. (Blackboard is knocking at his door too)
At first, this is to assist the current staff get some teaching tools available.
But there are indicators that they will shift more and more into non-classroom environs.

It will be slow, but you'll likely see the progression over the next decade.
Not just in K-12...but also in higher education too.

For example, I'm now continuing my own education at a State University, which emphasizes online courses... (great for FT workers, BTW)
But the classroom is only an option, if I choose it...and they only have one day of the whole week for this...the rest of it is online.
This is going to happen more and more.

Again, I'm not saying that classroom teaching is not a better way, it IS better...it's just not where the "decision makers" are slowly pushing to.
Please battle them to make the right choices...but IMHO it's going to be a battle of attrition.

BTW...I know you're going to hate this...so yell away, good teachers hate hearing this.

 

A followup in the Lincoln theory before...except when I read this...it smacks of a Progressive version of GWB's first 6 years.
Where they claimed they had a "mandate" from the people and election, despite both being VERY close.

They were very aggressive with making things in the mold they wanted..."we won it, we get the spoils".
With no real hesitation, leveraging their position, no concern for the opposition. Only certain outside groups or laws held them in check.

So should we protest Obama's new found pair? Or should we say, "Hey...they did it...why not them??"
Amazing what happens when you set a precedent...

Wasn't this provoked? Or just an opportunity being taken, because there are no more elections for him.

Obama’s power play
By: Stephanie Simon - January 31, 2014