The Dems will blame anything and everything except the fact they stand for nothing but leftist garbage. That is why they are losing so bad.

I expect that over the next several years, we're going to hear a lot of Democrats and non-partisan leftists give very candid views about both Obama and Hillary! and exactly what they did or did not do. I also think Bill Clinton, in particular, will be unable to resist giving his unvarnished opinion of Obama's legacy, and comparing it to what he thinks Hillary! would've done if she'd been given the chance in 2008.

(04-20-2017 05:40 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I expect that over the next several years, we're going to hear a lot of Democrats and non-partisan leftists give very candid views about both Obama and Hillary! and exactly what they did or did not do. I also think Bill Clinton, in particular, will be unable to resist giving his unvarnished opinion of Obama's legacy, and comparing it to what he thinks Hillary! would've done if she'd been given the chance in 2008.

There have been candid opinions. They just don't get much attention. Similar things would be 24/7 for a week if it were a Republican and repeated on every media source..

Obama was possibly the most terrible thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party. His substanceless cult of personality gutted the rank and file of the party all the way down to the state level. Like bloodless Stalinistic party politics moderates were sent to the gulag. All that is left after his reign are septuagenarian progressives - this is what you get with that. Rudderless loons lurching about.

(04-20-2017 07:27 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Obama was possibly the most terrible thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party. His substanceless cult of personality gutted the rank and file of the party all the way down to the state level. Like bloodless Stalinistic party politics moderates were sent to the gulag. All that is left after his reign are septuagenarian progressives - this is what you get with that. Rudderless loons lurching about.

It is always kind of humorous to hear them talk about Republicans being the party of old white people when their candidates were all ancient white people. The last 5 serious candidates the Republicans had (Kasich was never serious-he was just a spoiler for anyone not named Trump) included 2 young Hispanics, one married to an Hispanic immigrant, one married to an Eastern European immigrant and a Black.

(04-20-2017 07:27 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  His substanceless cult of personality gutted the rank and file of the party all the way down to the state level.

Ironically you could say that the same "cult of personality" got Trump to the white house though. Although it hasn't infiltrated the Republican party as much as the Obama "COP" did.

Quote:It is always kind of humorous to hear them talk about Republicans being the party of old white people when their candidates were all ancient white people

You know, it might be interesting to go back and re-look at the demographics of the elected officials (and major candidates again).

Democrats need a moderate Bill Clinton type with a positive message. The further left they go the worse it will get for them. Hating Trump and rioting will not win elections. The whole resistance playform is childish and an insult to people that really are oppressed

(04-20-2017 07:17 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 05:40 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I expect that over the next several years, we're going to hear a lot of Democrats and non-partisan leftists give very candid views about both Obama and Hillary! and exactly what they did or did not do. I also think Bill Clinton, in particular, will be unable to resist giving his unvarnished opinion of Obama's legacy, and comparing it to what he thinks Hillary! would've done if she'd been given the chance in 2008.

There have been candid opinions. They just don't get much attention. Similar things would be 24/7 for a week if it were a Republican and repeated on every media source..

Mostly anonymous, off-the-record, etc. Like the stories/quotes in Shattered, for the most part.

We're just now ending a period of 25 years (!!) when every Democrat had to stop and think "How will the Clintons react to this?" every time they opened their mouth. That's over now. A lot of people -- a lot who feel bitter that Hillary! and her world-class political-genius advisers drove the party over the cliff against Donald Trump -- are going to start saying "Hey remember that time when...?"

(04-20-2017 08:19 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Democrats need a moderate Bill Clinton type with a positive message. The further left they go the worse it will get for them. Hating Trump and rioting will not win elections. The whole resistance playform is childish and an insult to people that really are oppressed

Clinton was no moderate, he was a left leaner... But he was also a competent executive who, like Reagan (right leaner), was willing to "give a little to get a little".

But in regards to this aspect of the difference between Clinton and Obama is this... Bill Clinton was a team and alliance builder. Obama was a choir director.

After a brutal set of midterms in 1994 Clinton went about moderating his requests to congress and worked with congressional dems to get what he could. He liked "the game"

Obama seemed to resent the job and resent having to work with anybody, even the dems in congress.

(04-20-2017 09:38 AM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 08:19 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Democrats need a moderate Bill Clinton type with a positive message. The further left they go the worse it will get for them. Hating Trump and rioting will not win elections. The whole resistance playform is childish and an insult to people that really are oppressed

Clinton was no moderate, he was a left leaner... But he was also a competent executive who, like Reagan (right leaner), was willing to "give a little to get a little".

But in regards to this aspect of the difference between Clinton and Obama is this... Bill Clinton was a team and alliance builder. Obama was a choir director.

After a brutal set of midterms in 1994 Clinton went about moderating his requests to congress and worked with congressional dems to get what he could. He liked "the game"

Obama seemed to resent the job and resent having to work with anybody, even the dems in congress.

Bill Clinton also had common sense and a feel for common people (he was classic "white trash").

Like O'Reilly, he liked to feel common women as well. JFK went after better looking ones like Marilyn.

Compared to obama, clinton was a moderate. Lol. Economically, JFK was a reaganesque republican. You will note his fiscal policies are rarely mentioned by todays dems.

(04-20-2017 09:43 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Compared to obama, clinton was a moderate. Lol. Economically, JFK was a reaganesque republican. You will note his fiscal policies are rarely mentioned by todays dems.

Well using Obama as a benchmark would put a lot of people into the "moderate" category..

I think you're right in that Clinton governed as a moderate, but he only did that after the 94 mid-terms. BEfore then he was dabbling really far to the left

Quote:Keith Ellison Blames Obama For Being A Lousy Party Leader And Democratic Failures

Blind hog, meet acorn.

(04-20-2017 08:19 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Democrats need a moderate Bill Clinton type with a positive message. The further left they go the worse it will get for them. Hating Trump and rioting will not win elections. The whole resistance playform is childish and an insult to people that really are oppressed

They had one in Jim Webb. He never got any traction. I think he may have been right of Trump - which doesn't take much in reality. He uses the Dem vocabulary, but it sounds more conservative.

(04-20-2017 09:43 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Compared to obama, clinton was a moderate. Lol. Economically, JFK was a reaganesque republican. You will note his fiscal policies are rarely mentioned by todays dems.

If there was a person who had the same political views as JFK ran today, I'd vote for him to be president (or her).

(04-20-2017 10:12 AM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 09:43 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Compared to obama, clinton was a moderate. Lol. Economically, JFK was a reaganesque republican. You will note his fiscal policies are rarely mentioned by todays dems.

Well using Obama as a benchmark would put a lot of people into the "moderate" category..

I think you're right in that Clinton governed as a moderate, but he only did that after the 94 mid-terms. BEfore then he was dabbling really far to the left

Bill Clinton wasn't an ideologue, he was a political chameleon.