Only time will tell. I hope for the best.

Yes it is too early to tell.

This is wishful thinking on some peoples' parts. They're counting not only on Obama not correcting the country's problems, but on him failing completely to engage the American people in the effort AND more miraculously, on the appearance of a candidate who would have such a great pitch that people would toss Obama over for their approach. NOT BLOODY LIKELY.

It's certainly too early to tell. I don't think Obama is likely to keep all of his promises, and perhaps some people will be disappointed when their pet project is put on the back burner. But isn't that the case will all presidents? There are a lot of people who are so devoted to him that it doesn't matter what he's unable to accomplish as long as the things he does do aren't wildly out of line with the values he promoted during the election.

But I can be fairly certain that I won't be voting for him in 4 years.

Unfortunately the possibility of such a reaction by the citizens is in the realm of likely. President Elect Obama made it clear in Denver that it will take two terms to accomplish his goals. Despite our general agreement to that point and despite our warnings to each other that the President has got his work cut out for him and we shouldn't place too much expectation upon him. Come election time all of that solidarity often seems to be trumped by our thirst for a bad buy, some one to beat up if things aren't rosy.

Now of course if he seriously F's up on something that in it self is reason enough to consider giving him the boot, but if the man is working diligently on the issues and it just isn't happening fast enough for us, then that is on us not him, he's doing what he can do. Then he'll have to deal with a conservative opponent who'll fan the flames of impatience while knowing fully well if they were in his shoes they wouldn't have been able to guarantee a one term turn around on all of the important issues to us as well. When that time comes we have to have the patience, tact, observation and intellect to make sure we come down on the right side. Do we give a sitting President a chance to fulfil a promise the majority of us were content with or do we allow a new President to come in ride the coat tails of the hard work that has been done thus far and claim the prize when they get to the finish line. IMO it's all very simple. If he F's up boot him, if he's working diligently and needs more time keep him.

Hold on, y'all. I can definitely see O as a one termer--as his choice. He is going to have to start off like gang busters, making tough calls. He will alienate some people, even in his base. These are tough times, and O is no pansy. He has bad and big problems to deal with, and he is not interested in winning a popularity contest. So maybe he will not seek a second term because he will be too tired out, but let's hope that he will have us heading down the right path in four years. He just might be the right person at the right time.

I actually voted no. I am hopeful, but there is so much hate that has been perpetuated towards Bush. I think he will again use that hatred in 4 years. A lot of people in the US are naive. Now I will hold my judgment of what he is capable of doing, until I see it done. But near as I can tell, his understanding of economics is not that impressive. I will also not blame him or give him credit for any changes in economics (ie. unemployment, inflation etc.) Because it has been shown that hind sight is the only way to truly gauge a presidency. When reviewing why we have the swings in our economy, people are so quick to blame or credit the sitting president. Things such as carter and reagan's so called "recessions" were initially assigned blame to them. When in hind sight it was 15-20 years of law making that had actually been the root cause. So I will let him do as he wishes, praying he will not impose too much control over my life, and go from there.

I don't know. I can't predict the future. The challengees will be tough but as long as there is some progress than I think he will get re-elected.

I hope he does good and if so gets re-elected.
but only time will tell as others have said!

Most reporters aren't all that good at predicting how a presidency will turn out - no one predicted what a miserable mess we'd be in at the end of either Bush term.

And contrary to what others have said, I don't think this country is all f*cked up. I will be happy if he doesn't fulfill many of his campaign promises. I think that he made big promises to people regarding the war in Iraq. But the economy, this is just a swing we need to ride out. And minimize damage. I don't think Obama nor McCain could have gotten us out of this nor do i think it was Clinton or Bushs fault. We have a capitalist society. People need to realize that and move on. Things cannot always go up... there is a max to the amount of capital that is available. So things have to go up and then down. Common sense. And contrary to what a lot of law makers believe, loaning and printing billions of dollars is not our way out of this. People scrimp and save, maybe move to smaller house, or in with room mates or family. We will ride the wave and see prosperous times again, as long as people don't make stupid irrational decision based on fear and a desire to be a more socialist country!

I can see both sides. Obama and his team realized even before he won the election he had set expectations too high and began try to lower expectations in the press. This happened as soon as the polls left no doubt he would win. So even before conditions worsened, he knew he would have a hard time not letting down his followers. So in that aspect he could very well be a one term president because the public will feel Obama was not the change they expected...regardless of whether or not that is fair.

On the other hand Obama has surrounded himself with people from the Clinton administration. Clinton was a populist and tended to follow the polls about what the American public thought. That among other things made him a very popular president. Even though Obama's views are considered very left of the general thinking of his party, he is smart enough to stay more centered for his first term to get re-elected. If he follows Clinton's foot steps, he will have a chance at keeping the public's approval.

I think he will do ok and could win a second term. As long as she's smart about it and make smart decisions that he could win an second term. Let's see

Janneth - Interesting perspective!

I like how the second option seems to imply that smooth talking can blame Bush for anything, even if its not true. Or at least thats how it sounded to me.

I do think he is eloquent enough to be able to spin either way. He's already setting himself a safety net by saying that he may not be able to accomplish everything he said he would, or that its going to take many years of work, or that not everything will be done this term.

I mean, I get where he's coming from and he's right that he wouldn't be able to 180 the country in 4 years, but at the same time it strikes me as a bit of preparing for failure and that I don't like.

Regardless, I think if the economy doesn't improve he'll be out in 4 years, whether or not its his fault unfortunately.

I also think that if he pulls back the reigns of the CIA and closes Gitmo and lets everyone free and there is another attack on US soil, he'll be done for.

I understand what leads to that conclusion, but anything can happen. Who would have thought that Bush would win a second term when he first took office? The close election and the way he was presented in the press didn't seem to bode well for him and then 9/11 happened. It's just too hard to say and everything is too uncertain to draw hard conclusions.

Only time will tell. I will say that I think most people know that he can't possibly keep promises he made in March with the economy the way it is. I think people still expect a lot from him, but most people I talk to are realistic about what he can achieve in the times we are living in.

I think I agree with Haus when she says if there is attack on US Soil, he will be gone. The American people will be looking for some one to blame and they will be afraid.

kastarte, I agree with your points, only one thing I disagree with.
"The American people will be looking for some one to blame and they will be afraid." the way that Haus laid it out, he would be the one to blame. Not that the Americans would just simply be on a witch hunt. If he closes Gitmo, and ends the occupation of Iraq, we will be more susceptible to an attack. Not sure if I took what you said out of context or not, but it kind of made it seem like we would just blame him because he was pres, which some people might, but not all.

And that picture totally made me think of "shaking hands and kissing babies!"

I think his response to an attack will dictate those terms kastarte2 not the attack it self. If his administration runs around like the key stone cops yeah he's gone. If his response is strong assertive effective and to the point he's going no where because he just provided us a sense of security in the wake of an attack.

I think you have a point, Hypno. His response may have more impact than the attack.

Hain, I think who ever the sitting president is at the time of an attack is likely to be blamed whether or not the blame is really his, if that makes sense. It may be his fault and it may not, either way, I think it may not go well for him if there is an attack. But like Hypno says, his response may actually be more important.

Hainan Obama was at Ben's Chili Bowl with DC Mayor Adrien Fenty. A lot of celebrities and politicians stop by place. Bill Cosby goes there every time he's in town. I mentioned Cosby because I saw him on the news Saturday morning at the Health and Fitness Expo talking about stopping by Ben's Chili Bowl.

I have the stomach flu today. But liliblu's mention of chili tells me what I will have for dinner. It ALWAYS settles my stomach.

If I recall, O loves chili, and hates ice cream.

"If he closes Gitmo, and ends the occupation of Iraq, we will be more susceptible to an attack."

The very creation of Gitmo is what makes us more vulnerable to attack, not closing it.

lili- I am thinking you are only posting that to get my goat, right?

or is that where the pic was taken? Wait... I'm confused.

I voted "With a good campaign, Obama will still be able to blame disappointments on Bush", but only because it's funny.

The options on this poll are jacked up. Where is the moderate and reasonable "No, not everybody expects the world of him, nor will a 'campaign that blames everything on Bush' be the only way he can win a second term" option? I really think the people who voted for Obama are a lot more realistic and reasonable concerning Obama's first-term challenges than they're made out to be. No one actually expects unicorns to come prancing out of rainbows ridden by leprechauns showering the world in gold, you know. Well, I hope no one does.

Well today UnDave President Bush Blamed plenty of disappointments on himself. I guess he wanted to help Obama out with that burden.

True that, hypno.

He won comparing McCain to Bush and he'll run for a second term complaining about Bush.

Of course it's too early to tell.
Still, I think Americans are expecting way too much from both Obama and the government. Those who think the government is the cure-all for your financial troubles are sadly mistaken. I just hope Obama knows that Americans really can't afford a trillion dollar bailout right now. Because that's where the money will come from to pay for this thing...Americans.

"Trying to tax your way out of an economic crisis is like standing in a pale and trying to pick yourself up by the handle."
-Winston Churchill

awesome quote carrie.

Hainan the pictue was taken at Ben's Chili Bowl.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/01/11/PH20090111...

He and Fenty ordered a house specialty, a Chili Half-Smoke _ a quarter-pound half pork and beef smoked sausage on a steamed bun with mustard, onions and chili sauce _ along with a big helping of some cheese fries.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/10/AR200901...

This a picture of Obama with Mayor Fenty (seated).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/01/11/PH20090111...

It IS way too early to ask - he is still not the President!

This looks alot like '76 with Carter getting elected having full control of the house and senate with the backdrop of economic turmoil. We can only hope the result is the same.

I agree with Jude C. I don't think he'll need to blame anything on the Bush Administration and I didn't vote for him because he compared McCain to Bush, chancletta, though I did find the last 8 years to be grossly disappointing. No one who has a bit of sense in their head is going to expect everything to be perfect after this four year term. I voted "other" because there was no option I liked.

'This looks alot like '76 with Carter getting elected having full control of the house and senate with the backdrop of economic turmoil. We can only hope the result is the same.'

The Republicans sure as hell don't have a Reagan-like candidate they can insert into the election fray, so I'm doubtful. There is still a major advantage an incumbent enjoys running for their second term, without a good GOP candidate no matter what Obama does in his first term I think he will win a second term (if he chooses to run). Unless Republicans vote against Obama and not for a candidate, which would be funny since they were so up in arms about people voting against Bush in the '04 election.

Generally I think its way too early to tell.

It will be interesting to go back and look at predictions like this is four years and see if some people were on target or way off.

That's a lovely baby he's holding, by the way.

And Modus, considering how well voting for Bush twice turned out for some of the predictors, I'm willing to put money on how their predictions turn out.

Hainan the picture was taken at Ben's Chili Bowl on Saturday. Read the picture caption.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/01/11/PH20090111...

Steph's right. She is a cute baby.

I really believe he's a fad. While I'm sure that some people, and a lot of them right here on this site, voted for him because they believe in him, I think for the most part voting for him was a fad. He is new and different and so NOT George Bush. But, I also believe that he will show his true colors over the next four years and people will be disappointed. No, I don't think he'll be re-elected.

Do you know him personally clara?

And what are those 'true colors'?

RED WHITE AND BLUE!

No more than you do momma, but I have no faith in him.

I don't like the answers to this question. I like to think he will be able to improve the country. As for needing a good campaign to blame it on Bush I think everyone is more than ready to do that anyway.

Kind of like yesterday, when Bush complained that he inherited a recession...

"Kind of like yesterday, when Bush complained that he inherited a recession..."