This little analysis from first Read on MSNBC.com ( http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/... )explains why I get frustrated with progressives/liberals sometimes...
"With multiple reports today (in the NYT and National Journal) about how liberals are upset with Obama’s policies (on Afghanistan and other issues), it makes us wonder if it’s much easier to be a Republican president rather than a Democratic one. Consider: Because there are more self-described conservatives than liberals, GOP presidents are freer to play to their base and not rely as much on the middle to win national elections. In addition, Republican presidents typically don’t face much dissent from GOP members of Congress. Even as the Iraq war became an albatross for Republicans, almost all of them followed George W. Bush off that political cliff in 2006 and 2008. And on issues that Republicans now say they disagreed with Bush -- the spending, the deficits, No Child Left Behind -- the criticism was barely audible while he was office. By comparison, a Democrat has been in the White House for just 10 months, and the left is freely criticizing Obama over Afghanistan, health care, the economy, judicial nominations, you name it. Many liberals and Democrats would probably pat themselves on the back for this kind of independence. Then again, maybe there’s a reason why Republicans have controlled the White House more times than Democrats have over the past 40 years... " Emphasis mine.
The little progress we make with a Democratic president gets completely wiped out because we then get apathetic, nitpick, criticize the person who's about 70-75% on our side.
The Republican president comes in, his side pretty much sticks with him until the very bitter end. I know, it's not really the way to go...
But.. I sometimes wish we weren't that easily dissatisfied. Think long term.