Thursday, January 21, 2010

El Mercurio

Bill Galston and I fuss at each other about Prez Obama, in El Mercurio, newspaper of Chile's capital, Santiago.

El problema es que hasta ahora los intentos de reforma y la implementación de planes económicos han dado malos resultados políticos: los congresistas han perdido respaldo en sus distritos y la popularidad de Obama ha caído significativamente.

Michael Munger, profesor de la Universidad de Duke, sostiene que los demócratas interpretaron mal el mandato con el que llegaron al gobierno. El voto por Obama fue para el político carismático y no para todo su programa, asegura.

La mayor desilusión ha sido para sus seguidores. "Por años, él hizo campaña asegurando que reduciría la polarización política", comentó a "El Mercurio" William Galston, analista de la Brookings Institution. Pero durante su gestión la brecha entre los partidos ha crecido, dijo Galston, y se ha visto poco del bipartidismo prometido.


For some reason, it tickles me to think of Bill Galston as an "analista." I'm just sayin'.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Want a quick and dirty translation?

The problem is that until now the attempts at reform and the implementation of economic plans have given bad political results: Congressmen have lost support in their districts and the popularity of Obama has fallen significantly.

Michael "Cheese lover" Munger, janitor from Duke University, holds that the democrats misinterpreted the mandate that brought them to power. The vote for Obama was for a charismatic politician and not for his whole program, he assures.

The greatest disillusion has been for his followers. "For years, he campaigned assuring that he would reduce political polarization," said William Galston, analyst from The Brookings Instituion. But under Obama, the gulf between the parties has grown, Galston told us, and little of the promised bipartisanship has been seen.

Anonymous said...

I totally agree with ses. Except for the google/blog spam part