Mark Halperin et Andrew Sullivan publient ici et ici des réactions au premier discours sur l'état de l'Union de Barack Obama. J'en cite quelques-unes dans le texte :
Ron Fournier, de l'Associated Press :
"Obama checked every political box needed to restart his troubled presidency... but that may not be enough to consider his State of Union address a success."
Peter Baker, du New York Times :
"It was a confident performance, more defiant than contrite, more conversational than soaring."
Joe Klein, de l'hebdomadaire Time :
"The eloquence and sense of purpose was riveting ... This was Obama at his best."
Sarah Palin, ex-candidate à la vice-présidence :
"There was quite a bit of lecturing, not leading."
Joe Trippi, ex-stratège de Howard Dean :
"He pivoted, not just on the economy, but against Washington, coming in again as an outsider."
Mark McKinnon, ex-stratège de George W. Bush :
"The speech was good, but not a game-changer."
Mark Levin, commentateur conservateur :
"I have watched many, many State of the Union speeches. This is the most partisan, least presidential of them all. His rhetoric, his glances at the GOP side, and his almost mocking tone at times - not to mention his over-the-top dissembling about the deficit, among other things - will not, I predict, improve his position with the public. Nor should it."
Matt Yglesias, blogueur progressiste :
"This is a brilliant speech. Realistically won't do any good unless senate centrists grow consciences, unemployment falls."
(Photo AP)