Actually, I stand corrected. It doesn't radically change the point I made but I just discovered Obama wasn't actually a professor, but senior lecturer. Still, lecturers do need to be good orators.

There's also a lot to suggest Tricky Dick had some mental frailties, paranoia and so forth, that probably didn't do his Presidency much good (though not particularly a bad trait to have during the Cold War; paranoia was healthy!)

I never gave Reagan credit for the end of the Cold War (that was all Nixon's doing for my money). Reagan's great gift was bringing inflation down by 8% from where it was under Carter. That changed the face of US economics for years to come, otherwise I think the US could very well have lost its place as the number one economic power to either Japan or Germany.

Unemployment levels were actually fairly close to where they are now, but by the time he left office they were halved. Obama wouldn't mind achieving the same, I'd hazard a guess. Many economists believe the boom in the 1990's owed as much to Reagan's policies as they did to Clinton's. I'd say they both contributed to the boom of the 90s, with Reagan laying the groundwork.

Would Clinton have been as successful without Greenspan? I suspect not.

(Yes, I still believe Greenspan to be more capable an economist than Volcker, but that's just me. Under AG the US economy saw unprecedented growth)

Over the past couple of years I have come to the conclusion that it is all about getting your message out to the public (those being polled). Have they understood what you are trying to say? Do they believe your story or the other guys? If approvals go up does it mean those polled with really vote for you (and your platform) 9 months from now?

I'm thinking....Stan

New logo is definitely more legible. Still not entirely clear, but you can make out what it says now, with a little help from the caption below it.

I actually preferred the old Obama Poll Watch [date] -- Subtitle method. It was easier for the reader (I felt) to tell the overall point you were making about the polls when it was up there in big letters. Gave the whole piece more...punch.

In keeping with yesterday's nitpickiness, I point out that I'm experimenting with the title of these columns.

I used to use "Obama Poll Watch [Jan. 10] -- Subtitle," and then last month I put the date at the beginning. Still didn't seem right.

So this month, it's just the column title and the date. Subheading added before the first block of text.

Any thoughts, regular readers?

Oh, and the OPW little logo thingie (top right, all pages except the OPW page) got a little easier to read, as I darkened the text a bit. Let me know if it's still illegible or not (still have to fix the FTP logo, I know...).

-CW

Now he seems a bit more like the guy they voted for. He just, as you say, has to start actually delivering on the good speeches with some action.

For my own part, as a Republican (albeit a moderate) I hope to God the GOP has learnt its lesson about engaging Obama in a war of rhetoric. The man was an incredibly gifted lawyer and Law professor. Lawyers are often good orators but Obama is one of out of the top drawer, as we say on this side of the pond.

For all Nixon is reviled today because of Watergate (and rightly so, I won't try to justify that sort of behaviour), there are many who argue that his Presidency was, by and large, a good one. Didn't George McGovern actually say that aside from continuing the Vietnam War (he did, it must be noted, bring it to an end) Nixon's foreign policy was nothing short of brilliant and he'd be remembered well by the history books? A bit too far, perhaps, but I think he did achieve a few good things that get overshadowed. The Clean Air Act, attempts to bring about comprehensive healthcare, similar things to what Obama is attempting now with the Climate Change legislation and healthcare reform.

Besides, Nixon was in Executive office for longer than even FDR. If we're talking purely electoral success, he won two elections as VP and two as President. Poll figures may not show it, but Nixon was good at winning over voters, something Obama already showed great skill at in 2008, and I'm sure you're hoping will be able to do again in 2012. Of course it comes as no surprise that I hope not.