Richard Cohen asserts that there is no hope for President Obama to increase his approval rating in his 2010 Washington Post article, “Who is Barack Obama?” Cohen details the continuing down fall of the economy and the health care reform that has not had an impact. In addition, the American public does not trust President Obama because his promises on these issues are constantly changing. Though I still have full faith in President Obama and that the Democrats are not a lost cause for the midterm election or the presidency in two year. I cannot deny the soundness of an argument from a man with extensive political knowledge.

Cohen uses his extensive knowledge of history to detail the parallels between President Obama and Regan’s administration. By midterm in Regan’s presidency his approval had steeply fallen and a recession continued, but the worst came when “Republicans lost House seats in the 1982 midterm elections, just as the Democrats are fated to do.” Cohen asserts that if President Obama’s ratings are falling and the recession continues then the Democrats will lose seats like in Regan’s midterm election and trouble is ahead for President Obama in two years. Cohen’s uses a classical valid argument form, hypothetical syllogism. This allows the readers to follow his train of thought and to trust he is not over simplifying the issue. In addition, given the history of politics we must also conclude that his premises are truthful and not simply a rant of emotions. his argument is a valid and all premises are true, this can only mean the argument as a whole is sound.

However, a sound argument must come from someone with extensive knowledge and Cohen has knowledge of politics. He has been reporting exclusively on politics for the Washington Post since 1968. This only adds to the faith the diverse readers of the Washington Post have in Cohen to revel the truth as he sees fit.