But as Obama wraps up his first full year in office, the American public has grown increasingly skeptical over his promises to change Washington and his "yes-we-can" agenda, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

A plurality of Americans believe his health care overhaul is a bad idea; fewer than one in five are satisfied with the economy; just 30 percent give him good marks on changing business as usual in Washington; and a majority think he has accomplished "very little" or "only some" of his goals over the past 12 months.

SNIP

In the poll -- which was conducted between Jan. 10 and Jan. 14 of 1,002 adults with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points -- Americans appear to have two different views of the president: They like him personally, but are more doubtful about his positions on the issues.

A combined three-quarters say they personally like Obama, and 52 percent have a positive view of him, compared with 35 percent who have a negative one.

In addition, he receives his highest scores on being easy-going and likeable (a combined 72 percent), being inspirational and exciting (59 percent), having strong leadership qualities (57 percent), being honest and straightforward (51 percent) and representing traditional American values (51 percent).

But Obama gets lower scores on the professional aspects of his job -- being a firm and decisive decision-maker (49 percent), being a good commander in chief (49 percent), being knowledgeable and experienced (47 percent), uniting the country (40 percent), achieving his goals (40 percent), sharing Americans' positions on the issues (38 percent), and changing "business as usual" in Washington (30 percent).

Waking-up now is what voters want Dem to do. But no, some Dems and the WH think the problem is Coakley, or her campaign.

Nobody wants 10% unemployment. That's simply unacceptable. Nobody wants this cruddy HC bill. It's a millstone.

Abortion is a big issue for a lot of voters, at least as big as same-sex marriage, or legalizing pot.

Feingold observed several years ago that he was not then convinced a national system was the way to go. He's backed off that position to get wit the 'team'. But considering the 'team' plan is about to cost Dems an important seat, maybe Dems who are actually committed to getting the job done better start applying themselves to getting the job done.

All that happens if Brown wins is that the current level of incompetence comes into sharp focus. Coakley pulls it out and the fuzziness and sense of 'relief' returns.

Someone on another thread observed this isn't about making Dems feel good about being Dems.

Imagine how different things might be now had Dems actually funded jobs projects directly, WPA style, rather than cut checks for big banks and Wall st. I've lived all my life in countries with national health plans. I'm not convinced that Feingold was wrong. I've visited the US often and spent quite a bit of time in MA,

Nothing is more important to the Americans I know than a job. It isn't clear that Dems will wake up to that fact even if Coakley loses. If she wins it's back to fantasy island. If Dems can't bring the unemployment rate to 6-7-8% by the summer, voters have every right to insist upon 'change'.

I hate the MSM.

1. Any Coakley win of less than 5% is a debacle. (Yes, we're already at that point.

2. Any Coakley loss is a disaster.

3. A Coakley loss by more than 5% is a disaster of unimaginable proportions.