President Obama waves to his supporters. Can he win the support of independents and Republicans? Photograph by Jason Reed.

Last week, just days after a State of the Union address that was reassuringly reformative, President Obama was invited to speak at a Baltimore GOP retreat, where he pressed upon Republicans the necessity of closing the partisan gap in Congress. Although the hour of question-and-answer that followed may have been more controversial and certainly more entertaining than the address itself, Obama’s speech to House Republicans was more significant: it was the greatest triumph of the First Amendment since Stephen Colbert’s scathing routine at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner in 2006.

But perhaps the Republican’s self-opposing stance that authorizing national media coverage as a “mistake” is only fair. Though it is true that Obama’s remarks were “chastising” and “confrontational”, these incivilities should not be allowed to preclude the point. What we should take away from this historical moment is not how well (or poorly) our politicians defend their rhetoric, but rather what Obama’s 20-minute “in-tele-promptu” offensive reveals about the success (or failure) of his presidency.

“These are serious times,” he declared after a brief introduction to the members of the Grand Ol’ Party. “What is required by all of us— Democrats and the Republicans — is to do what’s right for our country, even if it’s not always what’s best for our politics. I know it may be heresy for me to say this, but there are things more important than poll numbers, and on this, no one can accuse me of not living by my principles.”

Or can we? Just because Obama’s approval ratings have fallen to 47% in the past few months doesn’t mean this is a result of his political steadfastness, as this quote seems to suggest. Is Obama’s rhetoric of taking on the plight of bi-partisanship, ending war in Afghanistan (remember that?) and curbing the deficit reflective of reality, or is Obama really an ideologue, contrary to his denials?

Obama noted that he had already enlisted many of the Republicans standing before him to cross party lines. He mentioned working with Sen. McCain to make the largest increase in the Veteran’s Association budget in 30 years and dissolve state lines for insurance companies. He implemented Rep. Eric Cantor’s idea to make the website “Recovery.gov” and incorporated the ideas of Republicans Mike Enzy and Victoria Snow to create affordable “catastrophic insurance” for young people. This makes it hard to deny Obama’s willingness to work with lawmakers regardless of their political affiliation.

While Obama has followed through on his promises of bipartisanship, those on the left might argue that he is making too many compromises. Have his personal liberal views begun to gravitate towards centrist ones in order to achieve success as President? Perhaps. But while I, as a progressive, am aware of his diplomatic elasticity, I am also aware of the current state of our politics. Right now the most critical issue is not that our politicians lack good ideas; it is simply that we don’t trust them and they don’t trust each other – all with good reason.

Is Obama succeeding in using his position as President to its fullest capacity? Both his proposal to the GOP of a “modest fee on the nation’s banks and financial institutions to fully recover the taxpayers’ money” and his decree for all congressional earmarks to be made public before they came to a vote reinforced his seriousness in reigning in the national debt. Even after the senate rejected his idea just a day earlier for a “bi-partisan fiscal commission to confront the deficits in the long-term,” Obama made it clear that he would nonetheless establish such a commission by Executive Order. Having placed all his cards on the table, it seems rather obvious that Obama is not prepared to go on playing political games, and that he is indeed living by his principles.

It is interesting to note one of the many disarming claims made in his speech. Obama cited a recent CNN poll which stated that “while most Americans disapprove of the 2009 economic stimulus bill, they like each individual policy in it. When you break it down into its component parts, 80 percent approved of the tax cuts, 80 percent approved of the infrastructure, and 80 percent approved of assistance to the unemployed.” A more recent article on CNN clarified that while “Obama’s summary was largely correct,” the poll stated only 70% of Americans approved of the tax cuts.

Despite this interesting paradox, neither CNN nor Obama has offered a deconstruction or explanation. Obama’s economic stimulus package seems to be obscured by an air of blind disapproval—even distrust—despite the fact the individual policies are transparent, and most American citizens support specific mandates wholeheartedly. This suggests that the viability of the stimulus bill amounts to more than the total viability of its parts. We must imagine, then, that the American people are having some collective hallucination that up and vanishes upon closer inspection.

Obama may value principle over his popularity for the time being, but he will inevitably face re-election and be forced to worry about public opinion. Perhaps the best way for Obama to transform his stimulus bill from a failure to a success is to allow the American people to get closer to the political process. If they are exposed to and continue to see the political discourse inside Congressional chambers and witness the ideological crossfire, then perhaps the American public will be rid of this illusion. Obama successfully promoted transparency by airing the speech on national television last week. Subsequently, it should be no surprise that since the convention, Obama’s polls have begun climbing again for the first time in months.