Just to be clear, the "Bush Doctrine" was and claimed to be an just an extension of the "Clinton Doctrine". Personally, I think it's the right Doctrine for the USA to take, although some of President Obama's recent moves seem to take it to an extreme and might move us dangerously towards an Imperial United States (SPQR!). And remember, President Clinton's doctrine sent American troops into another foreign country on an average of once every nine weeks. And Clinton's actions in Iraq can arguably be taken as the Second Iraq War. President Clinton sent troops into more countries, then any President since WWII. And, personally, I think he USUALLY did it for the right reasons.
The US media elects our presidents and is the sole influence of approval ratings. Right now the Obama topic is in the negative portion of the news cycle, so it's no surprise that his approval rating is coming down. When news viewers get tired of watching negative Obama stories and the TV ratings go down, they will focus on the positives to inject new life into Obama coverage. And with that will come higher approval ratings.
LoL. So then according to you, none of this has anything to do with the economy, jobs, the war, health care, or anything else.
Actually, I think all of that is media related come to think of it. Each one has a case of being media influenced.
No, it has to do with his lack of attention to all of the above. That and his constant lack of priorities. People want the following addressed: 1. Economy 2. Jobs Obama is concentrating on: 1. Climate Change 2. Health Care No one gives two shits about either. One (we've recently found out) is bullshit, made up, and a crock. The other is nothing more than a way to perpetuate government spending.
~ "will signal a shift in our mission†- Rather a lame response when the shift should already be taking place, on this topic Obama gets a D- for appeasing the Republicans then trying to have it both ways.
Ah, I doubt very much he is appeasing anyone on the right. He does not have to, nor do I believe he would even want to. If he were, then you'd see actual health care debate on both sides of the isle rather than closed door sessions with only the left present.
Of course it does, but what matters most is how the US media frames these stories out. Obama was a media darling for over a year. Now the script calls for them to position him and the Dems in a slightly negative light to keep the masses entertained by the news shows. Even if what the Dems have put into motion is going to turn the economy around in 6 months, the media won't report that now because they can't report the same thing for the next 6 months. They are going to milk the negative stories for awhile longer.
I hate to shoot holes in your theory, but people were shouting down their congressional reps in town halls prior to the media finding Obama's sheen to be a bit dull. Hell, the media didn't even want to report it, unless they were slandering it. Arm of the Republican Party Racist Not representative of anyone Perhaps what you are seeing is the media's realization of reality, not the masses realization of the media's reality. They are slow, but they can be taught. Of course I can throw all the reason at your disbelief of Obama's dropping numbers, but if you are a good zealot, denial is probably preferable. Perhaps this chart would serve as a better sobering cup of coffee. Here you will find that less than 37% of Americans feel the news reports the news accurately, and 26% feel the news is unbiased. Perhaps you are arguing that the masses are such idiots, they are aware the news is fixed but blindly follow it anyway? I think people can look around at their many unemployed friends and realize things are not good.
~ Osama bin Laden and crew could not have been happier than to see the Bush Administration destabilize Iraq while bankrupting the US economy and likewise continuing the hostilities they desire now in Afghanistan by Obama and the disservice the American Military continues to exhibit for the sake of a handful of rough characters destined for martyrdom were they ever apprehended.
Isn't it amazing how Gallup was this wonderful, perfect, long standing 70++++ Years in the business pollster just a few posts back? Remember these guys talking about how Gallup was the GOLD STANDARD for polling? How Gallup knows best, while places like Rasmussen were right leaning? Now when Gallup starts displaying numbers even lower than a Fox News Poll, or Rasmussen, they are suddenly shifting sides? I just do not get these guys on the left. They only approve of things that they agree with.
Interestingly, Rasmussen is the ONLY polling outfit that does not use humans to collect the data. The polls are done by robo call with a disembodied emotionless voice asking the questions. They could still be loading the question format, sequence, and how they screen "likely voters", but they seem to have eliminated at least one of the human factors that could cause error in polling. Also, the attempt to determine "Likely Voter" status may explain why their results were the most accurate in the last presidential election. Asking people who have never voted, people under the age of voting, and people who aren't US citizens seems to serve little purpose in determining what the real outcome of an election will be, yet there are many polls on RealClearPolitics.com that don't even qualify registered voters (Voting population sample says "All").
Perhaps you'd care to share some of these videos you have showing him alive? This likely explains why they are so accurate.