And apparently neither do you. In speaking to George Stephanopoulos, Obama said (http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/president-obama-lost-touch-american-people-year/story?id=9613462) he focused too much on policy instead of speaking to the American people in his first year.


"If there's one thing that I regret this year is that we were so busy just getting stuff done and dealing with the immediate crises that were in front of us that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are and why we have to make sure those institutions are matching up with those values," Obama told ABC News' George Stephanopoulos in an exclusive interview at the White House.

The president said he made a mistake in assuming that if he focused on policy decisions, the American people would understand the reasoning behind them.

"That I do think is a mistake of mine," Obama said. "I think the assumption was if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on this provision or that law or if we're making a good rational decision here, then people will get it."

Let's see, who was complaining that he didn't get involved enough in his signature agenda? Oh that's right, Democrats in Congress.

How much did he speak to the American people (and everyone else). According to Mark Knoller at CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/20/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6119525.shtml), Obama's first year offered:

411 Speeches, comments and remarks
42 News conferences
158 Interviews
23 Town hall meetings
46 out-of-town trips to 58 cities and towns in 30 states
10 foreign trips to 21 nations (4 of them twice)
7 Campaign rallies (all of them lost)

If he'd only had a chance to speak to us we might have gotten it.

He talked enough but he wasn't saying anything. He is kind of like a really good IT person they assume since they know how something works you do too.

That wasn't him... it was TOTUS .

I loved the part when he said Brown won for the same reason he won. Does his narcism ever cease ?

Come on Spit, he's been "very clear." It's his favorite phrase.

He's about as clear as the East river. I was always an Independent until the '08 primary cause in PA you either have to be a D or R to vote in the primary. My new voter registration card will be here soon with a big ole I on it again.

I just wonder if Stephanopoulos asked him how he could be both "very clear" and out of touch? Nah, he's no Jake Tapper. Btw, in Texas we don't have to register as anything but a voter. I like that.

I just wonder if Stephanopoulos asked him how he could be both "very clear" and out of touch? Nah, he's no Jake Tapper. Btw, in Texas we don't have to register as anything but a voter. I like that.

In Carolina independants only get to vote in one primary, but you get to choose which when you go in to the polling station.

I am not registered in any party;and did not voted in a primary... and am content to not do so . I have also worked in a few campaigns .

I do not approve of open primaries. Too much mischief occures. I am convinced that John McCain ,possibly the weakest candidate in the Republican contest ,became the nominee in part because Democrat voter participation in the Republican primaries .

Here is what Wiki says about this issue
exit polls say John McCain failed to win a single race among Republican voters, up to Super Tuesday, yet during that same period he went from also-ran to front runner, because most non-Republicans who crossed over voted for him. In New Hampshire, Mitt Romney won among registered Republicans, but John McCain won overall. Likewise, in South Carolina, Mike Huckabee won among self-identified Republicans, but John McCain won the state.
Open primary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_primary)

They also point out Rush's 'operation chaos' in Pennsylvania.

I don't think it is a big inconvenience to register with a party as a prerequisite for participating in the their selection process.