Obama's Double-Leg Takedown of Bernie Sanders and Supporters

There’s a good post in a WaPo editorial by Johnathan Capehart in which he references some really good points made by Obama. I’m not good at this quotation and linking stuff but I’ll give it a go.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/05/09/at-howard-obama-had-words-for-those-blacker-than-thou-and-feeling-the-bern/

I’m going to quote some of the president’s remarks which are quoted in the Washington Post.

Undoubtedly referring to Bernie Sanders’ politics of frustration, Obama says the following (the bold is mine for emphasis):

Obama delivers some of his best stuff here:

He gets better:

And that’s my biggest complaint with the Bernie Bros. They don’t seem to understand this at all. They think passion alone and just installing their choice for president is going to change everything. Even if Bernie wins, they’re already losing their fight if they really believe this – and all the evidence I’ve seen so far indicates that they really do believe in their top-down strategy, or the “bully pulpit” strategy as I’ve seen it written. Very few times in history has that ever worked, and that has only worked when the outrage is overwhelming and almost uniform across the electorate. We do not live in such times.

Obama, though, saved his best for last.

And that’s the other problem I have. Don’t sit out in 2010 and 2014 and then show up in 2012 and 2016 and tell me how to vote. Save it – I’ve done more for democracy than most Bernie Bros. Part of the reason Sanders supporters are voting out of anger now is the fact that their own inactivity is what gave us an obstructionist congress - the worst in American history. And yet here they are advocating a top-down bully-pulpit approach and voting for outrage in an apparent attempt to compensate for their own lack of civic duty. America doesn’t need a revolution. It needs more education, a greater sense of justice, and more action.

Agreed 100%.

No argument from me. You build the house from the foundation, not the roof. I understand Obama needs to remain somewhat above the primary fray but I’m glad he’s coming out and saying this. Words the left should take to heart.

This is one of the best things I’ve ever read. Thanks for sharing!

The past century of this political philosophy has been a total waste for the vast majority of Americans. We have had non-stop cycling of economic bubbles, war, and economic busts. If we keep doing the same thing over again we’ll get the same results. Change requires building a critical mass, easy to prevent with fear-mongering. Great argument for conservative ideologues, more bad news for the country.

Good OP asahi, thanks.

[QUOTE=Obama]
And if you don’t get what you want long enough, you will eventually think the whole system is rigged. And that will lead to more cynicism, and less participation, and a downward spiral of more injustice and more anger and more despair.
[/QUOTE]

I think this is also true for Obama supporters that think he’s not liberal enough. The president is present of all citizens, not just liberal ones, and must make decisions accordingly.

And yet today’s Americans live better than any society in history. Seems like it’s working pretty well.

Obama wasn’t my first choice in 2008 but he’s been pretty awesome, If he could have a third term I’d certainly help him get it. That’s yet another speech that’s right on the money.

I think his major failing has been effective use of the bully pulpit. I’d much rather him out front giving impassioned speeches rather than trying to negotiate behind the scenes. His goal should be to get speeches like that to the front page.

It’s kinda sad as someone that pays more attention to politics than the average American I would have never seen it if you didn’t link it here

here is the speech President Obama Delivers the Commencement Address at Howard University - YouTube

Oh right, critical mass happens through a lack of voter participation. :rolleyes: The nation’s most meaningful laws get passed when progressive voters show up every four years and vote to support their spirited leader and then make him a lame duck two years afterward. That’s how things get done. That’s how New Deal, Social Security, minimum wage laws, Medicare, and Americans With Disabilities Act get passed. The Supreme Court gets packed full of democratic-friendly justices when voters wait for 16, or 24, or 32 years until the perfect candidate emerges. :rolleyes:

Misleading thread title.

I’m sure he had some of the expressed notions of some Sanders supporters in mind, but there’s nothing exclusive to them in there–and some parts that apply more to other segments.

Hillary was my first choice, but I had no problem voting for him over McCain and Romney and I agree that he’s largely worked out well. Obama was handed a hell of a mess to clean up and he’s largely done it without the help of republicans in the first two years and by being handed the worst, most obstructionist, gridlocked congress in American history. Not to mention the least popular congress nationally. That he’s been able to accomplish the passage of healthcare reform that has given more people healthcare coverage and that he has nearly 7 years of consecutive jobs and GDP growth to his record is not an insignificant accomplishment. And he’s done that by cutting deals and working with what limited powers he had. Again, things could have been different if more Bernie Bros would have showed up in 2010 and 2012 – well actually a LOT different. But they didn’t, so I really don’t want to hear them lecture us about not effecting change.

He’s been cautious - maybe too cautious - but it’s understandable. He has also had to endure more disrespect than any president in American history, on the sole basis that he’s the first black president. Hell even when it was obvious that George W Bush’s administration used false pretexts to invade Iraq, there was never anyone calling him a liar on the floor of congress. Every time he dared to open his mouth about matters of race he was labeled the race baiting president. I think he gave up working with congress and trying to get their respect. He just tried to get shit done, which is ultimately how he’ll be judged. History will judge him kindly, once we take the shades of the present off.

I’d agree that it doesn’t apply to Sanders voters exclusively. In fact many of his own voters in 2008 were probably similar to Sanders voters in 2016. I know it sounds like I’m attacking all of Sanders supporters, and I’d agree that my title was over-broad in that regard. I don’t have a problem with all of Sanders supporters, but some are delusional and don’t understand how their own government works and yet they want to change something they don’t even understand.

Well Said.

I agree with those who’ve thanked you for the thread topic, asahi; this was important and useful for us all to see.

Obama really called it, here:

Of course this is exactly what we’re seeing from many Sanders supporters, lately: a declaration that the System Must Be Rigged.

As impressive as Obama’s analytical skills are, perhaps his diplomatic skills are even more praiseworthy. I know I have trouble thinking of this ‘why should I bother to vote unless there’s a Candidate Who Inspires Me’ rationale for sitting out elections, as being anything other than pure cussed laziness. But Obama was much more tactful. I do admire him for that.

While he and you have a point, I really think this is why something like runoff voting for president would be best. Everyone can vote for their own particular weird candidate who inspires and agrees with them, even though they’re almost certainly not going to win in the end. There’s always a chance the votes fall that way.

The whole primary system is just a system that breeds disdain and distrust within mostly similar viewpoints. If people could just vote “1. Bernie; 2. Jill Stein; 3. Clinton” or whatever in November that would remove a lot of the uglier sides of political fanaticism.

There certainly are some good arguments in favor of the runoff system, as you point out, Jragon.

Indeed. Already in the first half of his first term there was friction with what Press Secretary Robert Gibbs called the “Professional Left” who could keep demanding from the safety of media and academia without having to deal with governing (and let’s face it, during those first two years with a Democrat Congress and a supposed Senatorial supermajority, he was stuck with *Democrat *members who were too scared for their reelection chances to do anything really bold - hence no public option, for instance, and fat lot of good it did them). I am sure that the 2014 midterms must have also been quite annoying in the repeat performance of his ostensible followers staying home when his name was not on the ticket. Yeah, inspiration schminspiration, how about electing officials we can work with?

But also, giving the commencement speech at Howard, he was bringing up the point that, yes, things are better but no way they are yet as good as they should be so yes you should go out and make things happen, but that while you can and should march and occupy and organize in the street and the net and be a leader in your business community, you also need to get into a position where you can affect policy by actually making yourself or an ally the policymaker. That does NOT have to mean yielding or surrendering the final goal, you keep your eyes on the prize but if there are means to get closer you don’t waste them and if there is a threat to roll you back you don’t refuse to use the tools and/or help available to block it.

But at the end of the day, can you answer Obama’s challenge? Do you know the local DA? Do you know your congressional district number? Do you know the rep? Do you know the mayor, the alderman, the state rep? Do you know who the judges or any of these people are?

No?!

Don’t waste your vote on Bernie then, because it proves you know nothing of the system. If you’re going to start a revolution, it pays to know what it is (and isn’t) that you’re trying to change.

But let me say this: Even if we dismantled every barrier to voting, that alone would not change the fact that America has some of the lowest voting rates in the free world. In 2014, only 36 percent of Americans turned out to vote in the midterms — the second lowest participation rate on record. Youth turnout — that would be you — was less than 20 percent. Less than 20 percent. Four out of five did not vote. In 2012, nearly two in three African Americans turned out. And then, in 2014, only two in five turned out. You don’t think that made a difference in terms of the Congress I’ve got to deal with? And then people are wondering, well, how come Obama hasn’t gotten this done? How come he didn’t get that done? You don’t think that made a difference? What would have happened if you had turned out at 50, 60, 70 percent, all across this country? People try to make this political thing really complicated. Like, what kind of reforms do we need? And how do we need to do that? You know what, just vote. It’s math. If you have more votes than the other guy, you get to do what you want.

Oh, boo-hoo. The voters didn’t come out and vote for my side. Well, what the hell did you do to get them riled up and wanting to vote? Is this a take-down of Sanders or Obama?

It is incumbent upon the people to vote, not on politicians to coax them into voting! FFS.

I came here to post about this same speech, which might just be my favorite thing ever. There are some other sections that I really love, so here is is my version:

H/t to Nicole for leading me to this, maybe my favorite Obama speech ever–and that’s saying something. In fact, it’s one of the greatest anythings ever. I heart it so much. Some excerpts of some of the awesomeness:

The system is great. It’s the people who are the problem. :roll eyes:

Otherwise… cite?

Leaders lead. People who are unable to lead bitch and complain, blaming other people.