== Very slanted == 

 The article is very slanted and is not much different from advertising for him.  Wikipedia should be neutral.  The most common thing is to cherry pick, particularly on a claim of being "bipartisan" and use this in this article.  The current authors should be fired for such a bad article. 

 One example (of many) is the slanted claim of helping the economy.  The economy is shit.  To blame him is partisan but having him take credit is partisan, too. 

 Try inserting that Obama claimed unemployment would be 9% if his plan was not passed.  So they passed it and unemployment got worse.  There are many sources for that. 

 Again, don't smear the guy but stop having a fluffy ad for him.