Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

My Pet Orangutan

(9,101 posts)
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 09:46 PM Nov 2020

Obama wonders if he shouldn't have been harder (on the GOP).

“I confess,” Obama says in the preface, “there have been times during the course of writing this book, as I reflected on my presidency and all that’s happened since, when I’ve had to ask myself whether I was too tempered in speaking the truth as I saw it, too cautious in either word or deed, convinced as I was that by appealing to what Lincoln called the better angels of our nature, I stood a greater chance of leading us in the direction of the America we’ve been promised.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-book-biden-trump-palin/2020/11/13/36c4828a-25b8-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html
66 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Obama wonders if he shouldn't have been harder (on the GOP). (Original Post) My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 OP
So happy to hear him say that. Phoenix61 Nov 2020 #1
Agreed. Obama had to not be too aggressive ... LSparkle Nov 2020 #6
you might have considered actually investigating and prosecuting crimes by the prior administration. bullimiami Nov 2020 #2
Yes choie Nov 2020 #16
I think Obama was diplomatic by nature True Dough Nov 2020 #3
Obama won FL, IA and OH twice, My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #4
You got THAT right!!!!! MyOwnPeace Nov 2020 #13
Nope!!! IsItJustMe Nov 2020 #30
I love him but yes. I think he was too tempered w the GOP. Vivienne235729 Nov 2020 #5
I think we saw, this year, what a more forthright Obama would have been like. My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #9
Oh well, the whole party pretty much flubbed that one BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #7
The first two years could have accomplished so much more than they did Ferrets are Cool Nov 2020 #18
Hoping we've learned this extremely costly lesson. JudyM Nov 2020 #66
Ummmm...YES!!!!!!!!! BigmanPigman Nov 2020 #8
I trust he's shared these concerns with Joe Blue Owl Nov 2020 #10
No question Obama was too soft in dealing with the GOP. Raven123 Nov 2020 #11
Yes, he should have been. PoindexterOglethorpe Nov 2020 #12
Sure with you on THAT one!!!! MyOwnPeace Nov 2020 #15
Yep. Republicans wouldn't have stood for it had we done it to them. (n/t) SMC22307 Nov 2020 #20
It was his singular flaw. nt Baltimike Nov 2020 #14
Welcome to Being Black in America Tarc Nov 2020 #17
LOL, this was discussed to death on DU. SMC22307 Nov 2020 #19
I never saw it as naivety as much as a testament to his decency and optimism NRaleighLiberal Nov 2020 #21
Merrick Garland My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #22
I completely agree. NRaleighLiberal Nov 2020 #25
What should he have done that he didn't do that would have gotten a hearing StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #37
He didn't even mention Garland's name at the 2016 convention BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #41
How would "mentioning Garland's name at the 2016 convention" have gotten Garland a hearing? StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #46
He was never going to get a hearing BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #47
Riight StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #50
Garland was a conservative/centrist to replace Scalia and maintain balance. joshcryer Nov 2020 #53
All of which made Garland a terrible choice to begin with BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #55
More second guessing StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #56
Tell me, which part of our base did a 60-something year-old white guy speak to? BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #58
The part of the base that assesses the value of a Supreme Court justice on their philosophy a StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #61
They. Had. The. Votes. joshcryer Nov 2020 #59
In the exact same situation they would have nominated Attila the Hun and marketed the fuck out of it BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #60
Of course. joshcryer Nov 2020 #62
Obama routinely avoided calling out Republicans...he would say "Congress" BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #63
Well, I agree he never did put on his "walking shoes." joshcryer Nov 2020 #64
Campaigned. My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #42
So you admit that there wasn't anything he could have done to get Garland a hearing StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #48
Exactly. betsuni Nov 2020 #51
Is there anything in Obama's presidency My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #52
Yes, there are StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #54
OK. My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #57
What should he have done that he didn't do that would have gotten a hearing? StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #38
Wouldn't have made any difference. How was he going to change the mind of Racist Whites ? JI7 Nov 2020 #23
Might have made a difference in the midterms, My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #24
You know what would have made much more of a difference in the mid-tems? StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #28
"more Democrats had gone out to vote for Democrats" My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #31
As I said StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #34
I am not 'whining' at Obama, My Pet Orangutan Nov 2020 #40
Obama agrees with you BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #44
The party leader bears SOME, but not all responsibility for election results StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #45
While I do wish he did. He didn't have the votes. joshcryer Nov 2020 #26
Thank you. StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #29
They obsctructed Al Franken from being seated. Ted Kennedy died. joshcryer Nov 2020 #32
And now they blame HIM because they let the House and Senate turn Republican StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #35
So, exactly, true. joshcryer Nov 2020 #39
Apparently getting mad, being passionate and "speaking truth to power" betsuni Nov 2020 #43
+1 uponit7771 Nov 2020 #65
He was a gentleman to them. William769 Nov 2020 #27
But then Luther, his anger translator, would've been out of a job. betsuni Nov 2020 #33
I don't think stronger rhetoric would have made a difference Buckeyeblue Nov 2020 #36
Is this The Onion? jalan48 Nov 2020 #49

LSparkle

(11,660 posts)
6. Agreed. Obama had to not be too aggressive ...
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 09:57 PM
Nov 2020

Because he could be accused of being an angry Black man. Hoping Biden can just do what comes naturally — and with this crowd that means making some major inroads to undo the racist policies put in place over the past 4 years.

bullimiami

(13,043 posts)
2. you might have considered actually investigating and prosecuting crimes by the prior administration.
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 09:48 PM
Nov 2020

the bastards keep coming back for another hack at democracy.

True Dough

(17,096 posts)
3. I think Obama was diplomatic by nature
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 09:49 PM
Nov 2020

Being "harder" on the ReThugs may have given him the appearance of having more "backbone," but I genuinely doubt it would have amounted to any more success. Led by Moscow Mitch, they were hellbent on blocking Obama's progress at every turn, whether he was passive or aggressive.

My Pet Orangutan

(9,101 posts)
4. Obama won FL, IA and OH twice,
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 09:54 PM
Nov 2020

He was a great president, but sometimes I think he does get enough recognition for being a very effective politician.

Vivienne235729

(3,373 posts)
5. I love him but yes. I think he was too tempered w the GOP.
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 09:55 PM
Nov 2020

But then again, he was demonized by the right for taking the high road too. Had he fought back harder, who knows what crazy nonsense would have erupted. How do you reason w an irrational, power hungry GOP that has suited up in machiavellian armor? The rules of engagement has changed since his time. Hopefully, we have become smarter and have adapted to this new mad max world w McConnell at the helm.

My Pet Orangutan

(9,101 posts)
9. I think we saw, this year, what a more forthright Obama would have been like.
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 10:03 PM
Nov 2020

Not spitting poison, as Joe Biden puts it, but using humor, including hard ridicule. We got a preview with his correspondent's dinner demolition of Trump. He said in a recent interview, he was only 'telling the truth'. That reminded me of Truman.

Blue Owl

(49,934 posts)
10. I trust he's shared these concerns with Joe
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 10:07 PM
Nov 2020

And I don't see Kamala as the "letting 'em off too easy" type...

Raven123

(4,716 posts)
11. No question Obama was too soft in dealing with the GOP.
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 10:07 PM
Nov 2020

For one, the only way to battle those yelling lies is to rapidly, aggressively and publicly refute them.

PoindexterOglethorpe

(25,750 posts)
12. Yes, he should have been.
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 10:11 PM
Nov 2020

The number one thing was he let them get away with not even bringing his Supreme Court nominee to consideration. He should have been pounding away at that every single day in 2016.

Tarc

(10,472 posts)
17. Welcome to Being Black in America
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 10:36 PM
Nov 2020

Kamala touched on this as well, when discussing prepping for the VP Debate. She had to be wary of the "Angry Black Woman" take, and tempered he remarks and retorts accordingly.

SMC22307

(8,088 posts)
19. LOL, this was discussed to death on DU.
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 10:41 PM
Nov 2020

Those of us saying "use the damn bully pulpit!" and others saying "the bully pulpit doesn't exist!" Ah, good times.

NRaleighLiberal

(59,940 posts)
21. I never saw it as naivety as much as a testament to his decency and optimism
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 11:07 PM
Nov 2020

I don't think he truly realized how awful human beings could be, and how polluted his opponents were due to right wing hate radio and TV. I think for all of us here, the depth that our opponents have gone is pretty shocking. And they go lower still, all the time.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
37. What should he have done that he didn't do that would have gotten a hearing
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:05 AM
Nov 2020

And please be specific - "fought long and hard" isn't a thing

BeyondGeography

(39,284 posts)
41. He didn't even mention Garland's name at the 2016 convention
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:24 AM
Nov 2020

He basically made it a non-issue in the campaign.

Try to picture how the GOP would have handled the same political situation for clues on how we got to a 6-3 Court.

BeyondGeography

(39,284 posts)
47. He was never going to get a hearing
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:12 AM
Nov 2020

It’s possible HRC wouldn’t have either. Had she won, however, Neil Gorsuch would still be someone only court geeks knew about.

By the time of the convention, it was about using the Garland issue to mobilize our vote and at least hold serve on the Court. He didn’t do it.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
50. Riight
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:24 AM
Nov 2020

If only Obama had mentioned Merrick Garland at the convention, Hillary would have carried Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania because all the Democrats in those states who voted for Jill Stein or stayed home because there was just something about Hillary they didn't like were living in caves all through 2016 and didn't know about Garland or that the courts were at stake. But if Obama had just told them in campaign speeches they probably never watched, they would have rushed out to vote for Hillary.

And if Obama had campaigned on Garland and Hillary still lost, he would have been lambasted for focusing too much on Garland when he should have been talking about other issues.

The best thing about Monday morning quarterbacking is that you can always find an excuse to do it ...

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
53. Garland was a conservative/centrist to replace Scalia and maintain balance.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:28 AM
Nov 2020

1) Garland would absolutely not have "mobilized the base" because he was hated by the left as it was.
2) He couldn't have got a more left leaning candidate nominated because it would've "upended the balance of the courts" but it would have been a campaign strategy against him. He loses more seats because it would embolden the right and the left would somehow find a way to poo-poo it.
3) The base threw Obama under the bus and literally nothing he did would've worked.
4) The Republicans knew that which is why they knew they could obstruct for 8 years.

BeyondGeography

(39,284 posts)
55. All of which made Garland a terrible choice to begin with
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:37 AM
Nov 2020

Who was excited by him? Why nominate someone with zero political value in an election year? When RBG passed away did the Republicans think for a second about nominating a centrist? If you’re going to go that route, you should at least fight for it when it could have reminded a few voters why they should get to the polls. He didn’t.

This was a good citizenship choice by Obama which played well with editorial boards and pretty much nowhere else. We saw how much that mattered in 2016, didn’t we?

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
56. More second guessing
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:41 AM
Nov 2020

If he had selected someone further to the left, it would have played out the same way - and Obama would have been blamed for not picking someone more centrist who SURELY would have been confirmed ...

BeyondGeography

(39,284 posts)
58. Tell me, which part of our base did a 60-something year-old white guy speak to?
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:46 AM
Nov 2020

My goodness. This was such a whiff.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
61. The part of the base that assesses the value of a Supreme Court justice on their philosophy a
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 02:01 AM
Nov 2020

experience and qualifications.

But I think it's laughable that you seem to think that the people who couldn't be bothered to get off their asses to vote for the first female presidential nominee and against the worst and most dangerous candidate in history would suddenly have gotten motivated to run out to vote if only Obama had selected a different Supreme Court nominee.



joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
59. They. Had. The. Votes.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:55 AM
Nov 2020

Of course they don't have to nominate a centrist.

The fact that they obstructed a centrist proves that they would have obstructed a leftist. Would that have then made the base turn out? No? Because Hillary lost. Because the base is fickle as fuck. The Democrats can't rely on 30% of the population voting hard line, down ticket, D. We're not dependable because of posts like yours that poo poo the problem.

We've lost every state house and now the new districts are going to be gerrymandered to fuck. They continue to entrench themselves in local politics (all local governments are Republican controlled and own cronyist shitstains).

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
62. Of course.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 02:04 AM
Nov 2020

And we would have obstructed it and raised hell.

Then we would've lost the Senate.

And we would've lost the House.

Because when we obstruct them, we go "oh that's it, we give up."

When they obstruct us it is pure fuel to them.

AND WE GO "OH THAT'S IT WE GIVE UP."

Because we simply don't acknowledge that they are the ones doing the unfair play. We don't get riled up by it.

For fucks sake McConnell has obstructed for 12 fucking years. TWELVE YEARS. And we are still crying about Obama not "talking" or "making noise."

This is infuriating. We are so screwed.

BeyondGeography

(39,284 posts)
63. Obama routinely avoided calling out Republicans...he would say "Congress"
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 02:27 AM
Nov 2020

It was always Congress needs to do this, Congress needs to do that.

If you listen closely enough, this is a problem with all of our leaders. They do not brand the Republicans. They’ll talk about Leader McConnell or President Trump, they do not talk about the Republican Party with any consistency at all. It’s mind numbing.

I think our voters are there to be mobilized, but they need better guidance. If our leaders fail to call the major problem of our time by its name, what do you expect in the way of outcomes?

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
64. Well, I agree he never did put on his "walking shoes."
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 02:52 AM
Nov 2020

And he had an incredible mandate.

But the time frame to do it would've been early. And he was not equipped to handle them at that level. He was a junior senator, didn't really know how things worked.

Regardless, when he did get the ACA passed, he used every string he could pull, and the Republicans highly resented that they weren't at the table when it was formed, and it went down party lines. For that they punished him severely.

My Pet Orangutan

(9,101 posts)
42. Campaigned.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:25 AM
Nov 2020

Speeches, rallies, interviews, supporting and addressing demonstrations in D.C., i.e. all the appropriate urgency when the Supreme Court is at stake. That may not have moved Mitch, but it would have boosted the GE effort.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
48. So you admit that there wasn't anything he could have done to get Garland a hearing
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:13 AM
Nov 2020

And you know what? If Obama had done all of those things, he would have been attacked by the left for making the campaign all about a moderate Supreme Court justice instead of issues voters cared about.

And if Hillary lost the election anyway, he would have been blamed for making too big a deal about Garland and not focusing on other issues and we would be hearing all about how if Obama had only downplayed the nomination, he would have given Hillary a chance to win and either renominate him or select someone else for the seat.

In other words, no matter what he did, he'd have been second-guessed by armchair Monda morning quarterbacks who are certain they know better than Obama did how he should have done his job but are certain that what he did he did wrong.

betsuni

(25,136 posts)
51. Exactly.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:28 AM
Nov 2020

The "Democrats don't have a message and stand for nothing except 'We're not as bad as Republicans/I'm not Trump' and 'What about the Supreme Court?'" thing.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
54. Yes, there are
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:30 AM
Nov 2020

But there's a difference between thinking there are some things that he could have done better and blaming him for bad outcomes.

My Pet Orangutan

(9,101 posts)
57. OK.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:44 AM
Nov 2020

I am sorry that I gave you the impression I was blaming Obama for poor outcomes - although I can see why you might have thought that. Second, guessing a politician on inadequate information is a favorite for blame-shifting, and, in the end, it's alternative history.

Obama himself wondered if he had been too cautious (at times) in word and deed. That was my starting point. My endpoint is that I am (more than) grateful to have been alive when he was the president.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
38. What should he have done that he didn't do that would have gotten a hearing?
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:09 AM
Nov 2020

And please be specific - "fought long and hard" isn't a thing

My Pet Orangutan

(9,101 posts)
24. Might have made a difference in the midterms,
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 11:15 PM
Nov 2020

nailing home the blame on obstructionist Republicans. A little red meat to get out the base.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
28. You know what would have made much more of a difference in the mid-tems?
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 11:26 PM
Nov 2020

If, instead of whining about what they thought Obama hadn't accomplished in his first two years and deciding they needed to teach him a lesson, more Democrats had gone out to vote for Democrats in the House, Senate, statehouses and state legislature.

My Pet Orangutan

(9,101 posts)
31. "more Democrats had gone out to vote for Democrats"
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 11:33 PM
Nov 2020

i.e. get out the base. The president is the party leader.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
34. As I said
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 11:50 PM
Nov 2020

More Democrats needed to stop whining about that Obama didn't do enough for them and gone out to vote for Democrats.

On edit: ... And not expected Obama to personally "inspire' them to get off of their asses and vote for the good of the country. Obama busted his butt campaigning and trying to get Democrats out to vote, but there was nothing he could do to assuage They insisted he needed to be taught a lesson because he wasn't "tough" enough and he had the nerve to try to govern like he was the president of the United States and not the president of the left wing of the Democratic Party (i.e., govern like the left-wing version of Donald Trump).

I am sick of hearing Democrats bitch and moan about how it's Obama's fault they didn't vote because he didn't kiss their asses with sufficient passion. They didn't stay at home because Obama didn't work hard to get them out. They stayed at home because they were pissed off that he hadn't saved the world in two years and decided not to vote regardless what he said or did.

My Pet Orangutan

(9,101 posts)
40. I am not 'whining' at Obama,
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:13 AM
Nov 2020

he was a great president, but a party leader must bear some responsibility for election results. The midterms are a referendum on the president's administration. The task falls to the president to defend his record, and, when Congress has obstructed his agenda, to call them out. Politics 101.

BeyondGeography

(39,284 posts)
44. Obama agrees with you
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:56 AM
Nov 2020
Lest you fear that A Promised Land is a rosy hit parade of successes, Obama acknowledges his own shortcomings and mistakes, describing his failure to pass immigration reform as “a bitter pill to swallow.” He also acknowledges that the economy “stank” entering the 2010 midterms, which allowed the Tea Party to reclaim the House of Representatives. Obama takes personal responsibility for the Democratic loss of House control, writing, "As far as I was concerned, the election didn't prove our agenda had been wrong. It just proved that... I'd failed to rally the nation, as FDR had once done, behind what I knew to be right. Which to me was just as damning."

https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/books/a34670429/barack-obama-memoir-a-promised-land-book-takeaways/
 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
45. The party leader bears SOME, but not all responsibility for election results
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 01:05 AM
Nov 2020

The responsibility also falls on the losing candidates AND large part of the responsibility lies with those who didn't think it was worth their time and effort to go out and vote.

Voters aren't gullible children who can only act if an authority figure convinces them to. They have choices and they have agency. And behaving as of it's completely the president's fault that they didn't vote is a copout. If they don't care enough about the country and world and the people whose lives their apathy impacts for the worse, that's on them.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
26. While I do wish he did. He didn't have the votes.
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 11:23 PM
Nov 2020

He couldn't do shit.

Reminder:

1) Obama never had a budget passed.
2) Obama only had the majority vote for 39 whole days.
3) Obama had appointments completely denied for 8 years.

The Presidency is actually not as powerful as it seems.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
32. They obsctructed Al Franken from being seated. Ted Kennedy died.
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 11:39 PM
Nov 2020

Lieberman was a DINO. We didn't have the votes.

Meanwhile I haven't seen a president more resisted from the far left. Obama's ACA was completely shit on by the left, the hostility toward him on this very forum was absolutely insane. AA people were ostracized. Even on this forum (don't believe me go to the Race & Ethnicity -> AA forum and read posts there).

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
35. And now they blame HIM because they let the House and Senate turn Republican
Sun Nov 15, 2020, 11:54 PM
Nov 2020

Interestingly, they portray themselves as political sophisticates, but then claim that unless Obama or Pelosi tell them to go vote using just the right language and pitch-perfect tones, they can't manage to get off their butts and go to the polls to vote for Democrats.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
39. So, exactly, true.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:13 AM
Nov 2020

We may have momentum to do something in GA, but if we lose? We will concede defeat and all down politics races will again go to the Republicans. And it's all by design. The Republicans use the far left, the purist left, to hurt us and we don't pay attention.

Note: you may read my journal to know how *far left* I actually am. I am very very much a far leftist. But politically I know how shit works.

betsuni

(25,136 posts)
43. Apparently getting mad, being passionate and "speaking truth to power"
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:30 AM
Nov 2020

will magically give one the votes and make Republicans be reasonable. Not having the votes means you aren't fighting hard enough and really don't want to pass whatever it is anyway because you're secretly a Republican Trojan horse or whatever.

Buckeyeblue

(5,491 posts)
36. I don't think stronger rhetoric would have made a difference
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 12:00 AM
Nov 2020

Honestly, sometimes I think the only way to deal with McConnell would be for a Democratic senator to kick his ass (literally) on the floor of the Senate. That person's political career may or may not be ruined but he/she could claim love of country as a reason.

I know we aren't suppose to advocate for violence on here. I would be against anyone other than a fellow Senator doing it. I don't think it would be the first time such a thing happened on the floor of the Senate.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama wonders if he shoul...