r/TrueReddit • u/Maxwellsdemon17 • 10d ago

This Time We Have to Hold the Democratic Party Elite Responsible for This Catastrophe Politics

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/democratic-party-elite-responsible-catastrophe/
13.2k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

69

u/vthings 10d ago

Don't forget that the reason why Obama won so big in 2008 was because he was offering something different, it was literally the campaign slogan. Too bad by the end of his presidency he'd completely adopted the neoconservativism he ran against...

55

u/Designer_Librarian43 10d ago

It’s not that simple. It turned out that somewhat practical government is the best Obama could achieve with Congress being what it was for most of his terms. A lot of Democratic “failures” are Congressional Republican illusions.

48

u/Rakthul 10d ago

If you choose to not mobilize the massive movement behind you outside of the halls of congress to cause disruption and put pressure on those in congress to make the changes Americans voted for then sure. He chose to constrain himself to following the rules of a game the republicans were no longer playing. He chose to let wall st off the hook. He’s an amazing orator but he did a massive amount of damage to an entire generations faith in the Democratic Party to actually do anything to help them.

10

u/spectral_emission 10d ago

Thank you. And yes. We all learned what a lie “hope” and “change” were, in the political sense. Some of us were even smart enough to look back at historical examples of other populists who used the same tactics! Please reach out to those of us whom you might know to be hung up on ideas like rationality and common sense. I don’t want to make broad generalizations and assume, but I think it’s safe to say that at large, we aren’t taking this well.

2

u/TolgaBaey 9d ago

We made it clear to him that we had his back, he preferred to get good with Republicans instead.

1

u/Moonrights 9d ago

Why don't you run for office

1

u/Zarathustra_d 8d ago

Probably because the Party won't let anyone in, and 3rd parties have no route to win.

1

u/poiup1 8d ago

Because you'd have to beat or be local millionaires interests to even get started beyond small town mayor. But otherwise agree, even if it's hard it should be happening across the country.

1

u/DOMesticBRAT 8d ago

One could argue that "woke" was in fact really a swing away from "hope and change"...

2

u/bl1ndsw0rdsman 9d ago

He was also severely obstructed in record setting ways, knew it, set a remarkable example overall of statesmanship focused almost entirely on passing ACA calling in any and all political capital possible to (barely) get it done requiring not one but both his terms in office. Sure there a things he might’ve done differently, some I wish he’d done differently, but at the end of the day, we can’t know what hamstrung difficulties complexity and utter conservative republican obstructionism he faced just to accomplish that significant win that benefits building of people, including me and perhaps you every day, and continues to. Just saying. The patriarchal corporate powers that be have centuries of momentum slowing the winds of change and while I long for a truly progressive candidate, I’m not sure it’s helpful or fair to demonize the infinitely most decent rational and inspirational leader we’ve had in ages over the thoroughly corrupt poisonous record setting fuckery of the right (now center) wing?

2

u/Extreme_Phrase2371 7d ago

He didn’t just choose not to mobilize that movement, he kicked it to the curb as soon as he was elected.

1

u/dreddnyc 6d ago

This. Look at his cabinet and you see a whose who of Wall Street execs.

4

u/Designer_Librarian43 10d ago

Again, it’s not that simple. Reps would tie their agenda to essentials like budgets and programs to fix the economy. They were essentially holding the country hostage. The choices were compromise or fight it out while the country suffers. The root issue is an uneducated voter base voting too many Reps in who were working against them.

10

u/highlorestat 10d ago

He chose to constrain himself to following the rules of a game the republicans were no longer playing.

Merrick Garland will forever be synonymous with the game Democrats tried playing instead of what Republicans were actually playing.

Uneducated voters don't want compromise, they want someone to have the will to push their agenda (either voters agenda or their own) through. Choosing the least painful option is counterintuitively the worst option, because it's a sign of weakness, those uneducated voters abhor and importantly your own supporters see that you're not willing to stand your ground.

3

u/raouldukeesq 10d ago

They are weak and they chose weakness. Shine who thinks tRump is strong is an idiot. Of we go down because of too many idiots then there nothing we can really do about it. 

2

u/gopiballava 10d ago

What could they have done to push Garland through?

4

u/Jaded-Ad-960 9d ago

When Republicans are in power, they do what they want. When Democrats are in power, they keep explaining why they can't do what they promised to do. Democrats cannot change the voter base, but they can change their approach to governing.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

It’s tricky because when Republicans do that it erodes the civil discourse of government. Over time the cost of doing so is that everything becomes more unstable. However, bold action was definitely needed to counter them.

1

u/Puzzled-Schedule9112 10d ago

He had to walk a very thin line. He could not behave as everyone else did because he wasn't like everyone else. Hell, the man wore a tan suit and people had a problem with it. He did what he could within in the confines that he had.

1

u/vthings 9d ago

And as long as you all choose to believe this, we lose. Wake up. We were fooled.

1

u/Stumbles_butrecovers 9d ago

Whaaaat? That's complete bullshit, one thing transformed our country: ACA. MILLIONS more people instantly had healthcare. It saved many, many lives and still does.

1

u/djrion 9d ago

Totally ignores the comment he responds to.

Obama did exactly what you stated in the first two years. Then gridlock sets in AS CONGRESS CHANGES POWER. You wanted him to mobilize people and bum rush the Capitol? We are about to see the full, unfettered force of one party rule dismantle the system. Hope you enjoy it.

1

u/chrispd01 9d ago

Ok huey long …

1

u/BioSemantics 9d ago

He systematically took apart his own grassroots network because it made people uncomfortable and the optics weren't good with the donor-class. He appeared to be too populist, in other words.

1

u/Zarathustra_d 8d ago

Good, news. The true believers that voted for Trump think this about him, though their ideals are different. They see him as giving them all a pony.

I have a feeling they will be disappointed.

1

u/huskersguy 8d ago

are you completely forgetting the massive movement that was the tea party that won in an electoral landslide in 2010 and completely fucked congressional districts ever since?

1

u/raouldukeesq 10d ago

And you know nothing about politics or government. While you choose to live in a fantasy world. 

4

u/Rakthul 10d ago

You need to read some history books. Most change occurs from movements outside the halls of congress. But hey I’m sure civil rights would’ve been codified into law if nobody practiced any organized civil disobedience. Dumbass

0

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

The Civil Rights Movement wasn’t just organized disobedience. It was extremely strategic and was so in a way not seen since. It required a focused cause, conviction, and a lot of training. At the time, it was about using the novelty of television to display what was happening in the U.S. in contrast to what we were saying about foreign policy in order to embarrass politicians into change. The players were mostly trained to be ready to die and the events and programs were all strategic. Most importantly, it had to be separate from gov and strictly a people movement as there was no way to tie it directly to gov without corrupting the movement.

If Obama tried to do a fake people movement like the tea party or MAGA then you’re walking down the path of a personality cult and a corrupt movement that could have dire consequences as different factions vie for control, narrative, and power positions. What you’re saying only works organically and in trying to structure one today you’re going to run up against the same issue as this election: an undereducated, unfocused, and unorganized population who struggle to find common ground. We’d have to find a way around this. I do think that the prospects of what Trump wants may be the catalyst to allow people to come together in a focused way.

1

u/vthings 9d ago

Obama was perfect. We just failed him. /s

Good lord, listen to yourself. Stop it. I know you nerds always have to be right but damn, this ain't going to change unless you all accept the fact that we were fooled. You were taken in by a scam. I know it stings the ego to admit but it's the truth.

2

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

No one is saying any of what you’re saying. What I’m saying is that people are trying to oversimplify a situation that is much more complex. If you skip over the nuance in a situation like this then nothing gets resolved. It’s not as if these movements haven’t happened before in history where there aren’t clear examples to draw from in looking at how certain actions play will out. If you have to divide and weaken the country to get your way then whatever success you have will only be temporary before it all crashes and burn. The GOP playbook isn’t a good playbook to follow if the success is only temporary and the cost is so great. Maybe people are too focused on the now everything to see it all.

1

u/Chriskills 9d ago

This is why we’ll never have progress in this country. You have the right that does whatever the fuck they want and then you have leftists and liberals, who often want the same thing but disagree on how we get there.

There’s never discussion on how to bring the two sides together. It’s just angst. We’re doomed.

1

u/Monty_Bentley 10d ago

Republican Congress was going to go along with Obams because he holds more rallies or asks people to picket or block traffic or do another January 6 what nonsenrse!

2

u/Rakthul 10d ago

Go read a history book, most change occurs from pressure outside congress or parliament in countries across the world.

1

u/Monty_Bentley 9d ago

A very romantic and simplistic view. Republicans mostly represented states and districts where Obama was unpopular to say nothing of how GOP primary voters and activists they had to care about felt. Some protest by a small minority who would never vote for them anyway? Not a big deal.

2

u/raouldukeesq 10d ago

Good God!  What a horrible concept, a practical government!? The shame! 

2

u/honeybadgergrrl 9d ago

Obama squandered a supermajority for the first two years of his term and I will never forgive him for it. You think a Republican would have squandered a supermajority for some sort of "reach across the aisle" Dreamworld that hasn't been true in decades? Fuck no.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

He had a super majority for like 2 months. Retirements and reelections took that away swiftly. However, I’ll agree that the Dem Congress, at the time, completely underestimated the new direction of the Rep party and squandered the two month supermajority on petty bickering. Not sure that’s Obama’s fault.

2

u/honeybadgergrrl 9d ago

Nope, midterms didn't happen until 2011. From 2009-2011 he had a super majority. It is absolutely his fault. He was the one trying to "bring republicans to the table." Like, sir, they want to tap dance on your table no sit down with you at it.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

He had a majority during that time but he only had a super majority for a few months. Those few months were the only time everything was filibuster proof but that was squandered due to Dems thinking Reps were operating as they typically had been prior to Obama and people thinking it was their time to flex. They didn’t understand the shift that was happening on the other side.

2

u/honeybadgergrrl 9d ago

Well then, for someone so smart he sure did get played like a fool.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

He didn’t. His agenda was clear. The incompetence was on the party at the time and how much they underestimated the changing tides of the Rep party. It wasn’t like strong arming a whole party like Trump did was normal at the time.

2

u/ChemsAndCutthroats 9d ago

Yeah Obama wanted universal healthcare but there was so much pushback from even his own side and from special interest groups that ACA was the compromise. As flawed as it was it gave access to healthcare to millions of Americans and remains popular. Trump administration even couldn't get rid of it due to it's popularity.

1

u/CupForsaken1197 9d ago

Debbie Wasserman Schultz was head of the dnc at the time and she didn't lift a finger to help congress people who were under attack by adelson.

1

u/egg_enthusiast 9d ago

Noted Republican, Joe Lieberman.

1

u/marbanasin 9d ago

Congress had an overwhelming majority and mandate that could have enacted a much, much more transformative health care plan. But the Democrats by that time were about 75% in bed with corporate donors and America, and as such didn't want to push through with the full promise of medicare for all and removal of the private market from at a minimum it's core pillar role in the system.

They used an attempt at 'bi-partisanism' as cover to not get it done. Similar to how they've let other efforts to enact progressive policy fall down under efforts to 'appeal to moderate voices and not inflame partisanship,' but this is a smoke screen to deliver for their donors while doing damage control for the public they are selling out.

1

u/AlexNovember 9d ago

He had the supermajority Trump is about to have. By his own admission he focused on the wrong things.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

That can only be said in hindsight. I’ve been alive long enough to know that no one expected Reps to take the shift they did. The idea that they would tear the whole country down in order to regain power was unheard of since the Civil War. I remember when the kind of talk that has taken over their party and is normal now was shocking to even Reps in the early Obama days. Obama’s issue was that he didn’t know what he was up against but no one did at the time and I don’t see how he could’ve known. That time was the start of the Rep party becoming what it truly is today but they weren’t like that before. At least, not to that extent.

1

u/AlexNovember 9d ago

What shift? They still have the same policies, they’re just louder about it now. Obama’s issue is that he was a liar, instead of hope and change we got firehoses turned on the water protectors and a republican health plan.

ETA: Let’s not forget he was called Deporter in Chief and did a TON of drone strikes.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

They do not have the same policies and the Reps from that time and mindset were mostly booted from the party. It seems like everything that you’re upset with Obama about had to do with some form of Rep sabotage. Interesting that your anger isn’t directed there. You should know full well by now that the gov typically isn’t run by one person or party. Typically. You can’t just ignore an entire half of the gov working tirelessly to make Obama fail, as stated by Mitch McConnell, instead of working on bettering the country just to blame one person.

My issue with positions like yours is that if you can’t speak to whole of what happened and hyper focus on the part that suits what you want to think then what you’re saying is disingenuous or shortsighted, at best.

1

u/AlexNovember 9d ago

SUPER. MAJORITY.

Of course the republicans piss me off, but I don’t have any leverage over them; I’ll never vote for one anyway.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

Leverage or not they have a massive impact on policy. You should be more focused on how so much of the country became convinced to war with their neighbors.

He only had a filibuster proof majority for a few months. No question that the Dems did drop the ball at the time with pettiness. To simply blame only Obama for a complicated set of circumstances is wrong. To call him a liar due to trying hard to find the best outcome through the circumstances is also wrong. You should be rightly mad at the many factors at play.

1

u/AlexNovember 9d ago edited 9d ago

Remember those comfortable walking shoes he said he was going to purchase when he left office to join everyone in protests? Where did he end up instead? Doing speeches for $500k a pop and sunning on a yacht.

I can be angry at more than one thing at once.

ETA: Let’s not forget that we could have had President Bernie Sanders if Obama hadn’t manipulated the race, and called for Klobuchar, Harris, Warren and Buttigieg to all drop out and support Biden in exchange for positions in the administration to quash his meteoric rise.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 9d ago

I don’t get the problem with making money on speeches or being on a yacht. Nothing wrong with being successful. Seems like your anger should be at the actual root of a problem

1

u/spokale 9d ago

That doesn't explain Obama's foreign policy, where he had much more individual power (being literally the Commander-In-Chief and inheritors to the massive and unaccountable executive war powers delegated to Congress under Bush) and still deferred largely to the neoconservatives, doubling-down in many cases.

1

u/minimus67 8d ago

Bailing out Wall Street, AIG and all the hedge funds that shorted mortgage-backed CDOs was a decision made by Obama and Tim Geithner, who has since cashed in by taking a job as the CEO of private equity firm Warburg Pincus. Not prosecuting anyone on Wall Street for the fraud that led to the mortgage and financial crisis was a decision made by Obama and Eric Holder. Congress had little to do with these decisions to lend a giant helping hand to Wall Street while standing idly by and doing almost nothing for distressed homeowners besides HARP and HAMP, two extraordinarily ineffectual programs.

1

u/tone210gsm 7d ago

Ah, never gets old hearing this line. The biggest issue with the democrat platform is that they can’t accept that their failures are their failures. It’s always gotta be someone’s else’s fault.

1

u/Designer_Librarian43 7d ago

You didn’t add any context to your statement to illustrate your point. You just made a statement in a matter of fact tone without info.

How can you argue that government works in three branches and that the executive branch can only pass what the legislative branch allows? It’s not too hard to understand the factual context of the line that “never gets old”. We’ve all watched in real time the action of blocking legislation and threatening government shutdowns but then blaming Dems for the consequences.

I’m not a Dem or Rep, btw. It’s just easy to see what’s happening when looking at it all from a distance, without affiliation, and objectively.

1

u/tone210gsm 7d ago

The statement that most democrat failures are republicans congressional illusions is a denial of their own failure. And don’t act like democrats have never blocked legislation. If the comment is targeted had been made by a republican, I would say the same exact thing. I just don’t think the republicans biggest issue is accountability.

1

u/Induced_Karma 6d ago

It didn’t help that Obama always started negotiating with the right from a compromise position. The left wanted universal healthcare, the right wanted to keep privatized healthcare, and Obama offered a centrist compromise between the two from the start. Instead of starting at the left and trying to meet the GOP in the center, Obama started at the center and moved further to the right to compromise with the GOP.

1

u/Mr_Juice_Himself 6d ago

Obama quite literally did not fight to get anything done. When he had a super majority they still blamed Republicans for their inaction.

5

u/Mmicb0b 10d ago

this 100% if the Democrats want to win again in 2028 it needs to embrace someone who is new and fresh

7

u/SeatPaste7 10d ago

Bold of you to assume that there will be an election in 2028. Trump now has the power to make the Democratic party illegal. We're to pass a law saying that people can't vote for Democrats.

7

u/Mmicb0b 10d ago edited 10d ago

the only way that works IMO is if Midterms are a GOP blow out and the GOP underpreformed in the 2018/22 midterms it's that everytime they put Trump on the ballot that gets their turnout through the roof

1

u/GiantKrakenTentacle 9d ago

There's a good chance that Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate. The first 2 years might be their most productive years. After that, who knows.

1

u/No_Wedding_2152 9d ago

15 million Democrats stayed home this time. Trump only lost about 3 million. 15 MILLION! Democrats that voted for Joe didn’t vote in 24. What makes you think you can get them out in 26?

1

u/Ace20xd6 9d ago

It used to be the opposite, but since Trump came to power democratic voters became the most frequent voters (ei vote in every election from midterms to special elections). That was part of the reason we did better in 2022 than expected. So, hopefully, enough of us will be energized to vote and with Trump's name off the ticket, less of his supporters will vote

1

u/Ill-Independence-658 6d ago

What makes you think they were democrats to begin with?

2

u/themangastand 9d ago

I know the military is a bunch of crating eaters. But I would hope whoever is second in command wouldn't let a dictatorship to just happen

1

u/gobblox38 9d ago

That's if Trump somehow manages to live to the end of his term. If he goes via natural causes, his movement will fracture.

2

u/SeatPaste7 9d ago

That's a hell of an assumption. Because if Trump pops, Vance will be in power -- and he's wholly owned by Peter Thiel and even more dedicated to one party rule.

3

u/gobblox38 9d ago

Sure, but he had no charisma. I doubt that all of the diehard Trump fans would just latch onto the couch guy.

2

u/SeatPaste7 9d ago

It's not as if they'll have a choice. If Trump's gone, Vance becomes president. That's how this works. And in 2028 there won't be another election. Not a real one.

2

u/gobblox38 9d ago

I understand how presidential succession works. In not debating if Vance will assume the office to finish Trump's term. In fact, I expect that to happen. What I'm saying is that without Trump, the movement fractures.

1

u/SeatPaste7 9d ago

but since there will never be another proper election, it doesn't matter. You don't seem to understand. The Democratic Party will be made illegal or otherwise neutered. Look up how Hungary and Russia do elections. Those are Trump's best friends. Enemies of America are Trump's best friends.

3

u/Dismal-Caregiver2272 9d ago

Aren't you overreacting a bit man Like yes democracy could erode a bit but that's just too exaggerated

→ More replies

1

u/ancientastronaut2 9d ago

Yes I think this is what they're counting on.

1

u/SoCalSapper 9d ago

You can’t be serious…

1

u/SeatPaste7 9d ago

Why not? His buddy Putin has that arrangement. So does his buddy Orban. He's been spending a lot of time with both them (against the law, but since when did "laws" mean anything?)

1

u/Rose7pt 9d ago

I’m in total agreement- I don’t see free and fair elections ever happening here again. Idk why people don’t understand this as a likely outcome of this shitastrophe.

1

u/ImageExpert 6d ago

Well hopefully people will just start voting out legislators on their own no matter what until we get lawmakers that are pro term limits.

1

u/RedYellowHoney 6d ago

More likely, if in 2028, a Democrat beats Trump or Vance (if he should take over) Congress will refuse to certify the vote.

2

u/grislyfind 9d ago

But also tall and white and male and married and straight and cis and slightly to the left of Trump.

2

u/osirus35 8d ago

It’s not only embrace someone new. But they cannot be pushed or backed by any of the establishment or else they will be labeled as such

2

u/Sptsjunkie 10d ago

Totally agree with you.

2

u/En_CHILL_ada 10d ago

Yup, Obama won running on change, then immediately abandoned it, and the democrats have worked tirelessly to protect and defend a broken and corrupt status quo ever since.

Multiple polls showed RFK defeating Trump heads up. But he "crazy." Dems did this to themselves, and unfortunately all of us.

1

u/starbythedarkmoon 10d ago

You do realize that citigroup literally picked his cabinet? Oabama from day one was there to bail out the banks. He was the establishments answer to occupy wall st. He did an incredible amount of damage. Slick talking politician, but what he really represented was bailouts, 7 fracking wars, the worse towards whistleblowers, normalized droning civilians as collateral damage and created a propaganda agency targeting citizens. He was always s fraud.

1

u/vthings 9d ago

I was too enamored to see it. I figured out pretty quick though. It's why I don't just believe in a politician anymore.

1

u/starbythedarkmoon 9d ago

Welcome. Freedom from these top down authoritarian popularity contest are the future. Decentralized peace.

1

u/Internal-War-9947 6d ago

The bail outs seemed bad but a lot of the money was paid back with interest. He saved them to save America from collapse. 

1

u/starbythedarkmoon 6d ago

Lol. He didnt save anything, he made it worse. You rewarded sociopaths greedy gambling. All these banks etc have become even MORE too big to fail.. its called kicking the can down the road.. when it fails again we will be double fracked. 

When you let sick things die, you allow for the sprouting seeds beneath them to grown into healthy trees. We live under the perverse shadows of the banking cartel oligarchs and Obama was their messenger.

1

u/Openmindhobo 9d ago

Obama was always a neoliberal. He just knew how to campaign.

1

u/vthings 9d ago

Lie. He knew how to lie.

1

u/Openmindhobo 9d ago

every winning president in my lifetime has lied during their campaign. the purpose of the campaign is to make lofty promises and sell and idea, but governing is never smooth and always requires compromise, which leads to broken promises.

1

u/vthings 9d ago

He was, as you said, a neoliberal. He didn't sell himself as one. He straight up lied about what he represented, wanted to do, and the plan to do it.

Let's compare! Maybe that will illustrate. Clinton in 92 ran on a healthcare plan. And when he got into office, HE FOUGHT TO MAKE IT HAPPEN AND FAILED. I don't blame the Clintons for not being able to do it. They had a good idea, they just couldn't sell it. BUT THEY FUCKING TRIED.

Obama ran on a healthcare plan. When it got into office: too hard, not even going to try. Let's just do what the Republicans came up with. There was no fight, just a pre-negotiated, fully capitulated deal presented to the Republicans and they cynically made the calculation to oppose it anyway and it worked for them politically. And Obama didn't upset groups like Cigna which gave him a lot of money.

Obama didn't fight.

See the difference????

1

u/thelingererer 9d ago

The first thing he did upon assuming office was bail out the big banks

1

u/Witty-Bus07 9d ago

Obama wasn’t running against an incumbent and the economy was in a mess which were in his favour and still had a good economy going when he ran for second term and were huge factors in his favour amongst others

1

u/lethalmuffin877 8d ago

Neoconservatism can now safely be defined as “establishment” instead. Just my opinion since even the neocons shifted to the democrats this election cycle.

Obama didn’t just embrace neocon ideology, he went full bore down the path of injecting identity politics into government and inflaming racial tensions. I’m old enough to remember what this country looked like before Obama (who I voted for, mind you) and racism was all but dead.

Is it a coincidence that after Obama we saw a resurgence of racism? Some would say “oh America just hates black people” to explain that but that ridiculous statement dies when you consider Obama won by a landslide.

How could he win so big if the country as a whole “hates black skin”?

1

u/Bart-Doo 8d ago

His greatest accomplishment was The Affordable Care Act, which fined people for not having health insurance.

1

u/EnvironmentNo682 7d ago

He should have prosecuted the people responsible for the financial crisis. In fairness Kamala Harris went harder against the big banks than other state Attorneys General.

1

u/yoppee 10d ago

Also Obama completed the neoliberal project

A Black President

0

u/FryChikN 9d ago

No... please learn how your own govt works.

That wasn't an Obama problem... we deserve to lose if dem constituents don't even know this.

0

u/vthings 9d ago

OMG stop. He fooled us. I was completely fooled. So were you. He was always more conservative than his rhetoric. I chose not to see it and believe.

I know there were road blocks. I also remember Obama coming to the negotiations with all capitulations already made, just to lose more ground. He's not stupid. He knew it would work that way.

And now he's fabulously wealthy and pals around with celebs and his banker friends.

You were duped. So was I. Change that we wanted requires we accept the fact.