These nikkas spend more time trying to "own the centrists" than actually putting in work.Damn
Obama says Democrats should make sure Ocasio-Cortez has a platform
- Thread starter Macallik86
- Start date
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
I am confused, are you saying Clinton and Obama were progressive when they were president and it is not seen as such anymore?
not labeling either
just saying chances are the youth will be disappointed when they get of age and look back on how things developed
they buy into slogans and big dreams and inevitably get crushed by inaction
on the other side..in a few years youll have 18 year old trump fans that were excited by a wall and dreams of winning just to get neither
people get disenchanted and remove themselves from the process
in 4 or 8 years youll have 18 year old dem voters who were sold on free healthcare tuition free public colleges etc...that will be hit with the realization that they are going to take tens of thousands of loans for school and be disgusted
it is what it is
King Kreole
natural blondie like goku
There were enough Obama-Trump voters to swing the election to Trump, so I'm not sure I buy this argument that Trump won because people who voted for Obama twice wanted to "take the country back" from a black man. I think a majority of Trump voters felt that way, but that cannot explain the entirety of Trump's appeal. I think if Obama made more of an effort to govern and wield power, even just rhetorically, instead of capitulating to Republicans in the name of a fantasy of bi-partisanship, things would have been different.
King Kreole
natural blondie like goku
Sure, but what prompted this debate was Obama's post-term statements, the majority of which have been throwing water on the youth/progressive movement. He didn't have to make all these anti-progressive statements and actions after he left office. If he had left and then came out at least signalling he was on the side of progressives to "finish the job he started" or something like that, I don't think he'd be getting told to shut the hell up by activists, liberal media figures and freshman Democratic congresspeople. But this wing doesn't have patience for this guy who fukked up pretty badly and often, leaving us with this mess, and then turns around to scold progressives. I just don't see many people in this wing looking back at Obama longingly, whereas Bill got the revered treatment for quite some time after his term.
Well, his policies did play a large part in leading to President Trump, so...
I'm not saying Obama was a worse President than Bill Clinton, I'm just saying he's getting comeuppance faster. It's probably due to social and decentralized media allowing the left to have a stronger voice than in the early-aughts. People aren't in awe of the powerful and the elite as much anymore.
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
So then what are you writing? You are right about the slogans swaying people--which is ironic because Obama decided to criticize young activists for it despite giving us ambiguous shyt like "Hope" and "change," and "yes we can"--but Obama didn't run as a progressive and was not a progressive president. Progressives were calling out his bullshyt when he was President. I remember a lot of black people saying, "say bruh, are you gonna do anything for black people?" and the Clyburns of the world saying, "he isn't the president of black people, but of all people."
Those presidencies aren't aging well because they didn't do anything for real people. Obama's presidency brought us Trump due to white backlash and Obama's genuine inaction for regular people after the 2008 financial collapse. And again, he came in with a supermajority in the House and Senate, yet decided to listen to buffoons like Rahm Emmannuel.
Last edited:
People think don’t ask don’t tell, was homophobic today when in reality in the 90s it was arguably one of the most progressive social things the government had done in decades
Voice of Reason
Veteran
Obama again talking out of both sides of his mouth. Denounce Defund the Police while at the same time exulting AOC.
What does it say about Sanders campaign that Obama, an actual Democrat, can “snuff it out”?
This is a great article. Obama and those like him are necessary.
Opinion | Obama’s Curious Cautiousness
Obama’s Curious Cautiousness
He is a great politician, but he is not an activist.
Dec. 2, 2020
Matt Slocum/Associated Press
Barack Obama continues his rather strange mission to confront and correct young liberal activists. It is an odd post-presidential note: A man who is beloved and admired on the left is using his cultural currency as a corrective against those who are on a quest for change.
Wednesday morning on Peter Hamby’s Snapchat show, “Good Luck America,” Obama said this:
“If you believe, as I do, that we should be able to reform the criminal justice system so that it’s not biased and treats everybody fairly, I guess you can use a snappy slogan like ‘Defund the police,’ but, you know, you lost a big audience the minute you say it, which makes it a lot less likely that you’re actually going to get the changes you want done.”
It was not the first time Obama had taken aim at these young activists. Last year he also took a swipe at wokenessand “call-out culture,” saying, among other things: “If all you’re doing is casting stones, you’re probably not going to get that far. That’s easy to do.”
That speech got him an amen from Ann Coulter, who tweeted: “Good for Obama. (Not sarcastic!)”
These chastisements by Obama delineate the difference between the politician and the activist.
The politician may be popular, but the activist will rarely be. The politician can unify, but the activist often divides. The politician seeks to unify people around a set of beliefs. The activist seeks to right a wrong that has been held up by a set of beliefs. In short, the politician navigates the system, while the activist defies it.
The politician builds a coalition by using middling philosophy and policies that appeal to the most and offend the fewest. The activist is driven more by purpose, morality and righteousness.
There is a reason most of our greatest activists in America never became politicians: They would have had to compromise too much of themselves and their causes.
Of course, as a political matter, Obama is right in a way. He is looking at the path to legislative and public opinion success. To take that path, the power structure can’t be so much confronted as coaxed. Those who do not recognize your full humanity must be convinced rather than condemned.
But that all feels like cowardice and accommodation to the activists. They are right, after all. Policing needs to be restructured in this country. Part of the reason so many unarmed Black people are killed at the hands of the police is that policing itself has become sick and corrupt; it has become bloated and impervious to prosecution.
I believe that Obama recognizes this, too, to some degree. But to the politician, baby steps are still progress. Winning the hearts and minds of the populace in that tradecraft, it is the way — the only way — they believe that progress is made.
Possibly.
But it is also true that it is often the presence of an extremist wing — I say extremist here only because that is the way the opposition sees strident activism — that makes successes of the moderate position possible.
Part of the reason the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. could be so successful was the existence of the more radical — and less widely acceptable — Malcolm X.
Booker T. Washington was elevated because he was willing to forgo political power at a time when Black people outnumbered white people in some Southern states and were near a majority in others. The idea of Black political power and possibly even Black dominance had sent shock waves through the white South and animated white terror in the region.
This moment needs the radical young activists. It needs them to push far and hard. It needs them to confront the power structure, to stare it down, to demand its dismantling.
Obama is a good man and a great politician. History will always record him as such. But he is not an activist. He is not the person who can or will push for the immediate alleviation of oppression. That is just not who he is or how his power was derived. He is above all else a practical, left-of-center moderate.
His presence as president was his greatest symbol of change: a smart, competent Black man, devoid of personal scandal, who brought class and professionalism to the White House. He changed the idea of what was possible to America — including its children — and enshrined Black excellence at the highest level of government as just another normal thing.
That simple act, him doing his job well, was monumental in the quest for racial progress.
But none of that negates the legitimate cries of the activist that much more must be done, that Obama altered a racial image, for the better, but wasn’t able to alter the system of oppression. That was always too much of an expectation. No one can correct 400 years in eight.
But in their approach, the activists are right. I have no problem with “Defund the police.” I know that it means to reallocate funding so that social services and policing are properly weighted. If people are offended and “lost” because of that, they were actually lost before the phrase was uttered.
Opinion | Obama’s Curious Cautiousness
Obama’s Curious Cautiousness
He is a great politician, but he is not an activist.
Dec. 2, 2020
Matt Slocum/Associated Press
Barack Obama continues his rather strange mission to confront and correct young liberal activists. It is an odd post-presidential note: A man who is beloved and admired on the left is using his cultural currency as a corrective against those who are on a quest for change.
Wednesday morning on Peter Hamby’s Snapchat show, “Good Luck America,” Obama said this:
“If you believe, as I do, that we should be able to reform the criminal justice system so that it’s not biased and treats everybody fairly, I guess you can use a snappy slogan like ‘Defund the police,’ but, you know, you lost a big audience the minute you say it, which makes it a lot less likely that you’re actually going to get the changes you want done.”
It was not the first time Obama had taken aim at these young activists. Last year he also took a swipe at wokenessand “call-out culture,” saying, among other things: “If all you’re doing is casting stones, you’re probably not going to get that far. That’s easy to do.”
That speech got him an amen from Ann Coulter, who tweeted: “Good for Obama. (Not sarcastic!)”
These chastisements by Obama delineate the difference between the politician and the activist.
The politician may be popular, but the activist will rarely be. The politician can unify, but the activist often divides. The politician seeks to unify people around a set of beliefs. The activist seeks to right a wrong that has been held up by a set of beliefs. In short, the politician navigates the system, while the activist defies it.
The politician builds a coalition by using middling philosophy and policies that appeal to the most and offend the fewest. The activist is driven more by purpose, morality and righteousness.
There is a reason most of our greatest activists in America never became politicians: They would have had to compromise too much of themselves and their causes.
Of course, as a political matter, Obama is right in a way. He is looking at the path to legislative and public opinion success. To take that path, the power structure can’t be so much confronted as coaxed. Those who do not recognize your full humanity must be convinced rather than condemned.
But that all feels like cowardice and accommodation to the activists. They are right, after all. Policing needs to be restructured in this country. Part of the reason so many unarmed Black people are killed at the hands of the police is that policing itself has become sick and corrupt; it has become bloated and impervious to prosecution.
I believe that Obama recognizes this, too, to some degree. But to the politician, baby steps are still progress. Winning the hearts and minds of the populace in that tradecraft, it is the way — the only way — they believe that progress is made.
Possibly.
But it is also true that it is often the presence of an extremist wing — I say extremist here only because that is the way the opposition sees strident activism — that makes successes of the moderate position possible.
Part of the reason the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. could be so successful was the existence of the more radical — and less widely acceptable — Malcolm X.
Booker T. Washington was elevated because he was willing to forgo political power at a time when Black people outnumbered white people in some Southern states and were near a majority in others. The idea of Black political power and possibly even Black dominance had sent shock waves through the white South and animated white terror in the region.
This moment needs the radical young activists. It needs them to push far and hard. It needs them to confront the power structure, to stare it down, to demand its dismantling.
Obama is a good man and a great politician. History will always record him as such. But he is not an activist. He is not the person who can or will push for the immediate alleviation of oppression. That is just not who he is or how his power was derived. He is above all else a practical, left-of-center moderate.
His presence as president was his greatest symbol of change: a smart, competent Black man, devoid of personal scandal, who brought class and professionalism to the White House. He changed the idea of what was possible to America — including its children — and enshrined Black excellence at the highest level of government as just another normal thing.
That simple act, him doing his job well, was monumental in the quest for racial progress.
But none of that negates the legitimate cries of the activist that much more must be done, that Obama altered a racial image, for the better, but wasn’t able to alter the system of oppression. That was always too much of an expectation. No one can correct 400 years in eight.
But in their approach, the activists are right. I have no problem with “Defund the police.” I know that it means to reallocate funding so that social services and policing are properly weighted. If people are offended and “lost” because of that, they were actually lost before the phrase was uttered.
King Kreole
natural blondie like goku
Democrats dropped out and convince other Democrats to vote for another Democrat in the primary. Who snuffed what out?
ALL LIES.
when they're not in america, they think twitter is america.
King Kreole
natural blondie like goku
you have to be pretending to be stupid to act like Obama didn't have any role to play in unifying the Party around Biden once Biden showed he still had life after SC.Looking for Obama's hidden hand in candidates coalescing around Biden
It would be insane for him not to do so. He's the leader of the party, of course he had a preference.
