Should President Obama limit himself to a single term?

Two Democratic pollsters suggested on Sunday that President Obama could serve the country best by forgoing a run at reelection. Today’s Question: Should President Obama limit himself to a single term?

  • mimi

    No. It is an absurd suggestion. Most likely they were just trying to be provocative to get more face time on FOX News.

    Making himself a lame duck would weaken Obama’s position, not strengthen it. Look what it did for LBJ.

  • Hiram

    No. Leaving office prematurely won’t make Republicans any less Republican.

  • Tim

    No. He has been president for not quite two years. The mess we find ourselves in started at least back in the 1990’s. It cannot possibly be corrected in less than two years. We are such a myopic people.

  • Duane

    I was surprised to see this question this morning. I didn’t think the question about his capability was this pervasive. I don’t expect him to limit himself to one term, but if his standing continues to stay low or decline even further, he may be forced to. He made a huge mistake with the term, “have the Republicans sit in the back of the bus”. They were not the party of NO, but the electorate was unhappy and they changed the House and the many Statehouses, including Minnesota. It will be hard for him to build a consensus with the majority in the House with that term ringing in their ears.

  • Heidi Andermack

    Absolutely NOT!

  • John Helgerson

    This defeatist attitude is utterly ridiculous! The GOP and allied fringe elements would like nothing more than to stonewall for another two years, knowing that the White House will be in their hands come 2012. President Bush was given eight years to fumble and mumble through an era of sublime incompetence…why would any sane person want to abdicate the highest office in the land (although Sarah Palin no doubt would if there was money to be made) just to appease political opposition? Not gonna happen in my world.

  • Harlan

    Hell NO!!!!

    Republicans? Remember them? The ones who caused the housing crash with their bills in the 1990’s! The ones who opened up H1B visa’s so our unemployment is even higher! The ones who gave tax credits to business to end jobs in the United States of America and shipped them to Third World countries!!!

    Why are we listening to Republicans????

  • Naniboujou

    It’s an absurd question. The concerning trolling by those pollsters is duly noted.

    I would posit that the pollsters should declare they won’t provide any more polls after this 2010 election. That way, we can be assured that their polling to date was more sincere and trustworthy. By declaring they will no long do any polling, they can accomplish more in the next two years than if they continue with on their divisive polling agenda.

  • Marta

    No. Such a suggestion seems pointed to further the current spinelessness of the Democrats. Tougher, not weaker, please.

  • Jim G

    No! Democrats need to show some backbone and not roll over into a fetal position. You can’t show weakness to a bully.

    This “advise” comes from a white southern male. If you act like an enemy you likely are an enemy.

  • Gary F

    Poorly worded question.

    Obama’s ego won’t let him do that.

    The question should be………..

    Should Democrats start looking for another candidate to run against Obama because Obama’s chances are slim in 2012?

    It isn’t up to Obama, his narcissism blinds his vision of reality.

  • No president should limit themselves to one term. If they decide not to run and believe it to be a poor decision for one reason or another then that’s their decision. However, limiting oneself sounds different. It sounds like defeat. And a president who is defeated isn’t much of a president at all.

  • I find the very suggestion of this offensive. Was this question asked during George W. Bush’s first term? What argument is there that President Obama has done so poorly that he should not seek re-election? And more importantly, where are the documented facts to back up that argument?

    I’m disappointed that MPR is jumping into the fray of senseless media hype and fallacious attacks on a president who entered office under the worst circumstances in my lifetime. He has not been a complete success, and I am not satisfied with everything he has done, but he has saved the country from the worst financial crisis in nearly a century (or, at least, from the worst effects of it) and, along with a Democratic-led Congress, achieved the greatest progressive legislative accomplishment in a generation.

  • Cheryl

    No. Getting our country back on track after the disasterous Bush years is not an easy task. Correction is going to require sacrifices on everyone’s part. People want an easy solution. There is no easy solution. Obama wants to provide an easy solution to please people. That is his biggest mistake.

  • Martha Helgerson

    Fortunately, Mr. Cadell is not an advisor to President Obama. ( If I were him, I would delete my connection to former President Carter from my resume and keep my mouth shut about what any president should/should not do.)

    There were similar calls when President Lincoln was in office, primarily from supporters of slavery and the “free market” for plantation owners…Mr. Lincoln remained steadfast and resolute in his positions and policies, also fortunate for the nation. Only heinous acts such as those committed by Richard Nixon are a valid reason to resign from office or concede defeat before the fight is joined.

  • Gary F
  • Steve the Cynic

    Just to clarify, quoting from the article Gary F referenced, “only 26 percent of the public believes he will now be re-elected as President in 2012.” This is not about what people think should happen. Part of that 26% is pessimistic Republicans, and part of the rest is pessimistic Democrats.

  • Greg

    These questions are becoming more stupid each time, and only serve as fodder for decisive partisanship .

  • Dawn


  • Steve the Cynic

    If those polsters really wanted Obama to choose only one term, they would have persuaded him privately, so his announcement could be a surprise, announced with great fanfare and made to seem like it was his idea. By putting the idea out in public, they’ve made it impossible for him to do that without looking like he’s giving in to pressure. I think they were fearful Obama might take that course and were trying to prevent it.

  • gcb

    Absolutely not. We believe that Obama is our best President since FDR and should be given the support of all thinking citizens. Unfortunately, it appears that the unthinking masses are gaining.

    Your coverage is slowly sinking to the level of Fox news. We are very disappointed.

  • Julia

    HELL NO! People may have their complaints, but no one is perfect, certainly no President who has to run this divided nation.

    If anything, some of his predecessors should have been limited to a single term. Look where their multi-term presidencies got us.

  • Lou

    No! President Obama is the person that will give the country the best chance to keep the presidency in the hands of a political progressive. It will be more difficult for the President to get reelected since the Citizens United supreme court decision but if the republicans nominate a candidate in the Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee mode, President Obama should be able to convince the American people that turning the White House over to an unqualified candidate would not be in the country’s best interest.

  • Julie Klassen

    Absolutely not. America needs Obama and his vision for social justice! We are in such trouble because the un-loyal opposition works against those policies that promote a humane and democratic society. The mindless shouting, the willful lies, and the polarized thinking of those who think only of their own individual good must be combated.

  • Steve D

    NO, because “Yes we can!!!!!!!!!”

  • James

    YES. He has done more than his share of socialist mandates against the will of the majority.

    He can go bow to whoever he wants on his book tour.

    We need good honest leaders that have experience in the real world.

    A good leader will focus on the USA, find and implement CONUS alternative power. Keep us safe from terrorist and / or rogue nations. Lead us in space exploration. Round up illegals and ship them out, they can come back —legally.


  • John

    NO! Republicans never stop campaigning while the president worked on policy. The Republican Madison Ave Marketing Teams defined all Obama’s current policy efforts to stop the depression and make health care affordability available in terms of the crises they created. They are not statesmen but used car salesmen. The keep the money and we drive the wreck! Watch out!

  • Dan M

    I feel that a presidents term is too short already to get the things done that need to be done in the long term. Presidents should always run for reelection so they can continue to work in the long term benefit of the country.

  • Wilma

    If he still has the stomach for it, I’ll vote for him. We need a thoughtful president.

  • independent

    This is a crazy (and dangerous) idea. Our government is already in turmoil. Undermining this Presidency midterm would pull the rug right out from under us.

  • Jennifer

    This question is just playing into the constant, insufferable anti-Obama noise machine. No president has faced the conditions he has (2 wars plus epic recession plus Republican blockade united against any and all Obama efforts), yet because he hasn’t completely solved all problems in LESS THAN TWO YEARS, he shouldn’t run again? Pure nonsense. If anything, he needs to dig in and pursue his course more aggressively and expose the Republicans for the obstructionists they are. After all, how many of their leaders are on record as saying their goal is for Obama’s failure? Shameful.

  • Sharon Bowman

    Did anyone ever suggest that George Bush do this?

    As usual, Obama inherits the worst economy since the great depression, with 2 wars started by his predecessor – and not paid for – and, gee, he hasn’t fixed it all in 2 years.

    Americans are too used to the instant fix. When George Bush left office, the deficit was 1.4 trillion, the GDP was negative 6%, and we were losing 750 thousand jobs/month – we are now creating private sector jobs – not enough – but headed in the right direction and the GDP is positive – again not good enough yet, but headed in the right direction.

    Give me a break – this man has kept us all from standing in soup lines.

  • No, because the Republicans are only interested in Partisan agendas, and it will take Obama’s understanding and appreciation for the big picture and his ability to speak to the good in each ofus, rather than the fear, in order to finally get past stalemate we have with this radical bunch of Repulicans and Tea party folk who don’t accept thepremise of governance by compromise.

  • Kristine

    No, the very suggestion is foolhardy. No modern president will ever choose that path.

  • stu klipper


  • Paul

    No. While Republicans pursue ONLY partisan interests and the new Tea Party folk act like they don’t understand or accept the idea of governing through compromise to protect the rights of the minority, we need President Obama for his ability to speak to the good in each of us, rather than fear, and move toward the big picture of a sustainable, more just society that doesn’t play favorites.

  • George

    No. His presidency and congress have made significant progress in the first two years, and the populace hasn’t yet had a chance to digest the importance and benefits of these changes. We need more time to better understand the significance of these changes. In addition, the rich/poor divide has become so great in the past administration, our leaders need to correct this or we will suffer the consequences. Without his leadership, we will sink into aristocracy and peonage.

  • Steven

    What kind of question is that? Of course not. He is entitled to two terms, if re-elected, like any other President. Obama is doing the best he can without ANY help from the Republicans. Also, with a mess he inherited from Bush/Cheney, and previous leaders, both R and D. He’s actually accomplished more during his first two years than people realize. The main reason for all the negative feedback is Bi-partisan politics, which should be banned, along with all lobbyists, buyouts, bailouts, and spoiled politicians. If done, the Country might just survive. There should be a new party created called the “Common Sense Party.”

  • Kelli

    No. We traditionally elect optimists and fighters for president. They know full well when they get the job that they will be up for a “job review” by the people in an election after 3.5 years.

    Weak-willed political consultants/supporters afraid of a fight have always been around. All of our presidents had to hear them and ignore them at some point in their tenure. Obama is a fighter, regardless of how some entities try to portray him.

  • Debe Stattmiller

    What a ridiculous question of the day. Obama is our best medicine. Republicans need to get over themselves.

  • Jennifer

    Absolutely not! What were people expecting – that all ills would be rectified in two years? We elected a president in 2008, not a magician!

    Also, what will constitute “success” to people? That we have what we did in 2005? 2000? Market conditions in those times gave us an artificial high! What goes up must come down! “Get rich quick schemes” don’t work. “Fix quick schemes” won’t, either!

    Conservatives need to wake up – their victories in this midterm cycle are by no means a mandate!

  • steve

    if he wants to run so be it-it will take at least 8 yrs to undo the mess the previous 8!

  • Ron

    I am amazed at the stupidity of such a suggestion.

  • Kevin VC



    That’s rather a silly question.

    We have a rather impatient group of people who voted this term, who did not notice or know how slow our big boat of a country takes to turn back on course.

    After Bush’s spending increases, two wars we could not afford and one based off false information, deregulating and failure to follow the regulation in already on the books for banking and real estate industry…, and then the tax breaks for the rich who (mind you) are still not suffering…. Had all rocketed us out of a scheduled ‘pay off of the national debt’ under Clinton’s budget play book…

    All that took 8 years, and people expect less then 2 years to correct the ERROR THAT IS BUSH!

    No, as much damage as Bush did I think Obama needs 3 or more terms ….

  • David Arcaine

    That would be like a doctor quiting mid-operation.

  • Skip

    Don’t know whether he should, but I suspect he will not run for a second term. His whole history has been seeking the next job, not doing his current one, e.g., Illinois legislature, U.S. Senate.

  • Troy

    No. He deserves the electoral ‘shellacking’ he’s going to get in 2012, so he should take it like a man. 😉

  • JM

    No. What he is lacking is the strong network of support from family and political allies. He is naked against all the onslaughter. The media prefers to pick him to death. Kennedy’s father (50 year anniversary) would have sent the Mafia after such organized attackers. All he has is the support of the people. It is not him it is us!

  • Cj Coventree

    No, of course not. What an unusual suggestion. The scars of racism run deep.

  • Lawrence

    I think he should run. Two years ago, people wanted change. Today, people are afraid of what may happen, which Obama still controls. Win the war, turn the economy around, or prove the Republican and Tea Party agendas will not solve today’s crisis either. In politics, you are as popular as the good news around you. Today, it seems bleak, tomorrow, however, might be rosy indeed.

  • Moira Heffron

    No. Having the party’s support is necessary to get things done, but the party does not exist for its own sake. Try working it out!!!

  • Jordan

    No. Obama is offering us an alternative that we desperately need. If he does decide to run again, he needs to grow a little thick skin and stick to his principals. Compromise is good, but compromising with absurdity is folly.

  • MB

    The Dems need to hunker down and articulate a vision for where this country should go. After the disastrous prior administration, it will take some time to recover. Obama has improved things on many fronts. No more war crimes, no more suppression of science, no more oily boys writing our energy policy. Obama’s biggest flaw is he’s trying to do what’s right (cooperating), instead of what is pragmatic given the obstructionism and hatred spewed forth by the GOP.

  • Margaret Schneider

    No, President Obama should not abstain from running again. What a pointless idea. That would set America back to the Bush fiasco policies without a fight. America can not afford to do that. Now that republicans have a higher profile they will have to step up and actually produce something instead of just pointing fingers. I expect President Obama’s ratings to jump through the roof since these new representatives will have to actually produce something.

  • Barbara

    No, he should not. I’m disappointed that MPR would even entertain such a question. First, if you look at the time since Pres. Obama took office (less than two years ago, even though you keep referring to his last two years), much has been accomplished. People talk about his arrogrance, because they don’t like his swagger, but Bush’s swagger indicated he’s the guy you want to have a beer with, Pres. Obama just hasn’t bragged about his accomplishments. I betcha if McCain/Palin were in office, this question wouldn’t be asked, and the economy wouldn’t be better, probably worse.

    The great divide is being fed to us by the Republicans and their Tea Party co-horts, and, unfortunately too many Democrats and Independents are swallowing it.

    I recall when Pres. Obama was running he said, “I will make mistakes; the economy may not improve in four years, it could take longer.” He’s not perfect. However, as unfortunate as it may sound, it goes to the old adage in the black community, “the bar is always highter for blacks.”

    Somehow, the mid-term elections became a mandate that the American people have spoken. What happen to the 2008 presidential election where the American people spoke then. Americans have ADHD. Did they expect $$$ to drop out of the sky and everything would be all right? The Republicans became obstructionists, not working for the betterment of the “American people”, but for corporate interests.

    Those elected to the House and Senate who profess to have Tea Party allegiances will become the enemy they campaigned about. They will, for their own personal gain, be in the pockets of the lobbyists. They are not about working for the American people.

    Pres. Obama has been vilified, demonized, ostracized, and marginalized by those who have a problem with the fact that he is a black man who should not be president of this country, including the governor of Minnesota, Michele Bachmann (neither of whom could hold an intellectual candle to Pres. Obama).

  • Kyle D.

    No. But whether or not he should do so, the reasons listed in the article are preposterous. Every one of them could be satisfied during a second Obama term, should he be reelected, and none of the promised harmony would come to pass.

    It would be harder for McConnell to obstruct? It’s already hard, but he and the other Republicans are doing it. It would be harder for Democrats to be inflexible? Why? They’ll just be jockeying to be the next presidential candidate for their side, an excellent reason to toe the party line anyways.

    Does anyone really think that Obama detractors would even be able to respond positively to any Obama move at this point? It’s hard to shift from, “He’s a secret Kenyan Muslim Socialist out to co-opt our nation and steal our freedom” to “With this single gesture, Obama has proven that he is a great leader who united us all”. Hard liners would still be around, and still control the narrative, and they would all agree only that such a move would prove that Obama is weak.

    If people were willing to be as reasonable as the article seem to assume they are, they would already be showing it, not desperately focusing their efforts on ridiculous political posturing while ignoring almost every opportunity to address the nation’s issues.

  • Kevin M

    I honestly cannot believe this is being entertained at an unbiased news organization. Is it because of the GOP gains in the midterms? That’s funny, because I don’t remember anyone asking if Clinton should throw in the towel after the ’94 elections, or that Reagan shouldn’t run in ’84. Everybody was criticizing Obama a couple years ago for having a messiah complex, but what’s more messianic than having your own people turn on you and throw you to the Romans for crucifixion? Let the man do his job, and watch the slow progress happen. Do the Dems really think they’ll have a better chance at winning with a non-incumbent running against a wave of tea-partiers backing small government, or a proven leader who passed some government expansion measures that have already begun to work, and in two years will have gotten us even closer to recovery?

  • Clark

    Yes, that would be a nice gift to those of us who are actually pulling the wagon loaded with you low income democrats who keep whining for more government handouts. He is a lousy president who hasn’t a clue, which is why the democrats lost big in 2010. He is a typical far left democrat who believes his ideas are the only ideas that count, which is another reason the far left lost big. I don’t really care if he runs or not as long as he LOSES in 2012.

  • Chris

    YES!!! And I will vote for him, again.

  • Ginny

    He should absolutely run in two years. I agree with all those preceding responders who suggest this is a really inappropriate question. Any issues President Obama has have been exacerbated by the Republican desire to block his efforts to improve our country and the economy. How can one possibly move forward when being actively thwarted by The Party of No? Seriously, do we want to leave the country vulnerable to Palin and Pawlenty? Minnesota is already going to be in very tough times with the Republicans in control of the state legislature. We need a voice of reason, of the people, in the White House. America follows one of the least intelligent presidents with one of the most intelligent and MPR is questioning whether or not we want this president to continue??

    Every time I hear a Republican ‘authority’ on the air claiming that President Obama must listen to the people and compromise, I want to throw up. How hypocritical to demand that, after two years of publicly proclaiming that it is their goal to make sure he does not have a second term. Just having that mantra as their raison d’etre is evidence that they are not looking to do their jobs to help Americans, but instead to just have power. Give it up! Republicans had eight – 8 – years to improve our lots in life and look what happened. Instead of “manning up” and taking their lumps in 2008, they get angry because they were ousted and decide to hurt the one person (and a minority at that!!) selected by the people to lead them. They are the ones not listening to the people. And don’t even get me started on the anonymous amounts of money and the dirty tactics of this last election. Money has bought the election, and not cleanly.

    MPR’s guest yesterday talking about the state of journalism in today’s world really missed the point. He claimed that when he watched lots of opinionated bloviators on TV, he always considered their slant when considering their opinions. Well, most people are not so ‘educated’ to have that clarity of thought. Beck or Limbaugh have followers that believe every utterance, no matter how laughably ridiculous or factually incorrect or outright racist. And you ask if President Obama should step down after one term? Hell no!

  • Carrie

    No. Stupid question.

  • Joe Schaedler

    obama is the best US President I’ve experienced in my lifetime (I was born in 1977).

    Unlike all the Republicans of my period of existence, his priorities are in the right place, and of the Democrats, he is the most purely logical, reasonable and clear-headed leader I’ve lived under. He’s the best of both parties’ offerings for the past third-century.

    Of course he shouldn’t limit himself to just one term – four more years!

  • Karen S.

    NPR seems to be giving a lot of air time to the right-wing Republican/Tea Party viewpoint. This is disturbing, as NPR also claims loudly, “No rant, no slant,” as if the fact that people don’t shout their views, the views are ‘fair and balanced,’ so to say. This question is absurd. It’s what the Republicans want, so their pundits are pushing the idea. By spending so much air time giving voice to these people, NPR is clearly just fueling their cause. As a member of my local NPR station, which is pushing this same Republican view, I find this distressing and I’m seriously considering canceling my membership and no longer donating to this increasingly biased station.

  • Curt C.

    He should run, and get defeated by an actual progressive like Russ Feingold. Obama talks a great game, and if he actually lead like he speechified, he’d be a great leader. But he’s shown again and again on issues like failing to close Gitmo, failing to prosecute any previous administration offficials for torture, killing the idea of single-payer, hollow banking reform, cowardice in pushing for needed stimulus and job creation programs, & fighting against gay rights, that he’s certainly no Democrat I could ever be proud to vote for again. We deserve a real leader, not just somebody who sounds like one.

  • Wow, what a question. Were we asking the same thing about Bush? Either one? Or Clinton after the ’94 election? Don’t think so, which makes me wonder why we’re asking now. Obama came to office in the worst recession since the 1930s, a bloated budget, a war may questioned and because he hasn’t turned it ALL around in 20 months you’re ready to push him out?

    Give us all a break. Big country, big problems, will take some working together. He can handle it.

  • FF

    “NPR seems to be giving a lot of air time to the right-wing Republican/Tea Party viewpoint. This is disturbing, as NPR also claims loudly, “No rant, no slant,” as if the fact that people don’t shout their views, the views are ‘fair and balanced,’ so to say. This question is absurd. It’s what the Republicans want, so their pundits are pushing the idea. By spending so much air time giving voice to these people, NPR is clearly just fueling their cause. As a member of my local NPR station, which is pushing this same Republican view, I find this distressing and I’m seriously considering canceling my membership and no longer donating to this increasingly biased station.”

    NPR/MPR is feeling their government subsidy will be taken away. With the backlash against George Soros giving a boatload of money to NPR, to the Juan Williams firing, to Republicans taking over the Minnesota legislature, they are starting to add some center-right coverage. ITS ABOUT TIME

    It’s called diversity! This is no longer your little left wing haven any more.

  • Shane

    No, he should run again. It will make for an easy Republican win in 2012.

  • Joe and Mary Kernan

    Of course not! Its not Obama I’m concerned about ; rather its the judgment and memories–or lack thereof–of so many of my fellow Americans. Do people forget that until Obama was elected in “08 it was REPUBLICAN presidents who ran the country for 20 of the previous 28 years? Do they forget it was the sainted conservative Ronald Reagan who tripled the deficit? That it was the twice elected conservative George W. Bush who inherited a balanced budget and managed to start two wars, damage America’s standing in the world, and plunge the nation into its steepest debt and near depression? After all this, and Obama was elected and tried to remedy the catastrophe, it was the REPUBLICANS who vowed to thwart him at every step. Now, after years of running the government–and the country–into the ground, they decide we don’t need any government. Talk about arrogance and ignorance! What we don’t need is more REPUBLICAN government!

  • Gerry

    Any time things go poorly in the country there is a “throw the bum out” mentality. People look to change things and start to listen more intently than when things are going well.

    [That was a lot of the reason Obama was elected in the first place]

    It just so happened that as people were listening and looking for change this election, the Republicans, Limbaugh, Beck, O’Reilly, Teaparty, etc. shouted and blamed louder and as a result, the GOP won some elections.

    In my opinion, there are two main factors for Obama’s 2012 campain.

    -Will things start to improve enough for the average American [before election time rolls around or good but flawed legislation gets repealed completely] for people to realize that things are actually getting better.

    -Will his campaign be able to regain the booming voice and succinct message of the 2008 election.

    Should he run again in 2012?…Absolutely

  • Sue de Nim

    Steve the Cynic was not quite cynical enough this time. I don’t think the pollsters who put forth this idea were guided any motive so high-minded as the well-being of the country. I think they were placing a bet that Obama would run and lose after a campaign filled with even more vicious, nasty, mean-spirited attacks by the Republicans and their plutocrat allies. They’re positioning themselves so they can say, when the election is over, “Told ya so!” It’s nothing but a ploy to attract business to their firm for the 2014 election cycle.

  • Peggy

    Yes. Stupid question.

  • Greg D’ roseville

    better question … should congress members be required to consult with 40 consituents (by phone or in person) for every lobbyist that wants to talk to them. Yeah 40 sounds about right.

  • john

    Are you kidding? I don’t remember anyone asking that of Reagan whose poll numbers were lower than Obama’s at this stage of the game..

  • Annie

    Of course he should run again! He’s been extraordinarily productive, and people have absolutely unrealistic expectations about what he “should” have done. I hear lots of complaining, but not many answers about who would have done what better.

  • Ben

    Yes, BUT

    ONLY if ALL REPUBLICANS and independents Agree to RUBBER STAMP and vote yes on, without complaining, ANY AND ALL Bills put before them while he is in office.

    Otherwise NO!

    Dumb question.

  • Jason

    Seriously? … Aren’t pollsters supposed to “poll”? What could this suggestion possibly do to improve anything in politics? I suggest they stick to polling and statistics and quit trying to draw their own conclusions. Regardless of anyone’s opinion on Obama, does anyone think there is a remote possibility that he wouln’t run again? I’d like news to get back to reporting “facts” and stop reporting so much “opinion”.

    I didn’t vote for him, but I respect that he won the election. Can’t we give him him at least of couple of years into his term before demonizing him and everyone we just elected?

  • Ernie





  • Sue

    No. He’s doing well at this difficult job. He needs to stay strong on holding taxes for middle and working class income people and retirees, while letting the tax cuts for the upper class expire. That is why we voted for Mark Dayton who leads, and that is what we are expecting in Washington.

  • Patricia

    Say What!!!??? Better change YOUR name to MCR = “MN CORPORATE Radio.”

    That question is the kind of racist hateful question we’d hear from the copycat puppets who have the blessings of our corporate radio & tv airwaves.

    Where’s the question about major players in the republican party saying on the air waves & in print that there main goal was to see President Obama fail and as a result vote NO to everything, even things they previously championed???!!!

    What a racist question!

    How dare you! Outrageous & sensational—no class–shame on you MCR! More people NEED to listen to Democracy NOW for real news.

  • Doug

    Who felt the need to even ask the question? President Obama is doing a good job under difficult circumstances. He inherited a mess and is doing his best to deal with it. I believe no one could do better. Again, why is this question being asked?

  • Steve the Cynic

    The over-the-top negative reaction to this question by some folks on the left is disappointing, but not unexpected. Given that the idea was presented as an opinion piece in a supposedly respectable publication, it’s a reasonable question for MPR to ask– or at least just as reasonable as asking for opinions about any of the other dumb ideas that have been asked about here. Asking the question does not make MPR racist, nor does it betray any right-wing bias.

    Three decades ago, I proudly called myself a Republican, because that party was putting forth thoughtful ideas, while the Democrats were all in unreasonable knee-jerk mode, pandering to people’s worst instincts and basest motives with attention-grabbing sound bites. Now it’s the other way around, so I’ve been voting Democratic lately. Thanks for the reminder that hot-heads on the left are just as capable as hot-heads on the right of reverting to that sort of reptilian behavior if given the chance.

  • R H

    Based on his approval rating, how the GOP gave him a “shellacking” and the fact that he came home from the G-20 empty handed, I don’t think we have to even worry about a 2nd term.

  • person

    There is nothing unreasonable about MPR asking this question. I am an extreme liberal who voted for Obama in the election and I still don’t see anything wrong with simply asking whether people think he is doing a good job or not and whether he or another would best carry forth liberal ideals. That is a reasonable question and they are doing their duty as a news source in inviting opinion from people on both sides of the political spectrum. There is nothing racist about question Obama’s work as president. Rather, it would be racist to be too afraid to question him because he is black. True tolerance means treating him as a human, no more and no less than anyone else, and holding him accountable for his actions.

    And the fact of the matter is I am intensely disappointed in Obama. He has bent over backwards trying to please the far right because of his campaign promise to “reach across the aisle”- so much so that he has done virtually none of the things he promised to do for the people who voted for him. I knew that electing Obama would not be a miracle cure for the country- I knew there was much work to be done- but I expected he would do more than this. Quite frankly, the state of this country’s politics makes me feel sick inside.

  • Ron R.

    I think instead that the pollsters should voluntarily quit their jobs so someone with a modicum of intelligence might take their places.

  • Noelle

    No. And I too, think it’s a perfectly legitimate question to ask – just one much more likely to bring out strong and emotional responses. (which it seems to have, considering the number of responses that were apparently typed with caps lock on)

    While I, like so many of my peers, have been incredibly frustrated with politics in the last year or so, I still have tremendous respect for Obama. I do think that many of the proposals he made at the outset of his term have been terribly watered down from the complete lack of willingness from the republicans to compromise in any way.

    He was given a mess to work with, and I think he is doing the best he can with what he has available to him.

  • I would say yes, except I can’t imagine who the Dems would run instead. The only one I can think of is Hilary Clinton, and I sure as hell don’t want her running.

    I’d love to see someone run who’s actually a liberal. That’d be astonishing.

  • DNA

    If Obama revealed the truth as clearly as Hugh Downs, Carl Sagan, or the Union


    about the world’s most useful and beneficial plant and how Hemp/Cannabis was Unconstitutionally criminalized, it won’t matter, he will have saved the world.

  • No! The pollsters who wrote the article have rocks in their heads. They absurdly believe that if Obama declared he would not run in 2012, we would have the “end of polarization” and a sublime “government of national unity.” Hogwash! The conservative Republicans have vowed to oppose anything and everything that Obama proposes, says, or does. If he ended worldwide poverty, they would find something to scream about. The polllsters’ article is preposterous.

  • notyourlawyer

    I read the article by the 2 pollsters (carter & clinton) and can’t quite get my breath back. What a bunch of bull-puckee. Have they drank too much koolaid @ the Washington Post? Are they first hires for the Hillary campaign?

    It was a simplistic article but was even worse if you went to the “Live-Blog”. Softball questions lobbed at the 2 old guys. Repeat. Rinse.

    I’ve never felt compelled to come to the website – find the question – read the articles – form an opinion – and get mad enough to write a response….. So I guess you’re little plan worked.

    I vote NO.

  • Kevin VC

    Anyone who wants to blame Obama for anything about the Economy needs to read this first:

    After doing so I think any talk of blame will stop dead in its tracks…

  • angela nelson

    No,absolutely not! Our country needs to take a deep breath. We all essentially want the same things. Good health care, Good schools, enough money to pay the bills and keep the roof over our head, and the heat on.

    We want job security, and of course we want to feel safe as a country,

    We are in a huge mess. I know this has been said before, but 2 years to fix all this. Come on! I’m very discouraged by the polarity that continues, in spite of the many things we all have in common. I think Obama’s biggest challenge is getting ANYTHING done in this ‘us against them”climate. It’s getting dangerous. We need to come to our senses a a country! Lets work together people!

  • Brian

    I don’t have a problem with the topic posed by the pollsters in their article. I think we should discuss a lot of serious articles and books about political leaders. I would suggest as a future topic of discussion Vincent Bugliosi’s “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder.” The former Los Angeles District Attorney is a reputable figure in the justice world. The Iraq War will be with us for a very long time. We’ve never had an open, honest discussion in this country about President Bush’s role in taking us to war. It’s about time we did.

    Concerning the question about President Obama, my answer is no. I don’t think he could be more effective if he were to announce he would not run for re-election. That wouldn’t affect the polarization at all. The major problems Obama has been confronting to this point are the huge mess that President Bush left for him and Republicans in Congress determined to make him fail. Now he has to deal with the Bush mess, a Republican controlled House, and a weakened Senate. The prospects for America are not good. That’s not Obama’s fault; that’s the fault of naive voters sending right-wing Republicans to Washington DC.