Obama's Legacy

[Eboue]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Rado_N]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

What's this supposed to be showing?

 

[Ekkie Thump]

Two different days on which Obama gave some kids the surprise of a lifetime.

 

[Eboue]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Dumbstar]

Exemplary orator. If I wasn't a skeptical Brit I would have ordered some of that snake oil on Amazon.

 

[Abizzz]

Magnificent president when compared to his pre- and successor.


Still an utter disappointment though.

 

[Marcelinho87]

Didn't Obama drop more bombs than any other president in his time?

 

[Abizzz]

Didn't Obama drop more bombs than any other president in his time?

Yeah he was very enthusiastic about killing people by remote control.

https://www.cfr.org/blog/obamas-final-drone-strike-data

On January 23, 2009, just three days into his presidency, President Obama authorized his first kinetic military action: two drone strikes, three hours apart, in Waziristan, Pakistan, that killed as many as twenty civilians. Two terms and 540 strikes later, Obama leaves the White House after having vastly expanding and normalizing the use of armed drones for counterterrorism and close air support operations in non-battlefield settings

He isn't a good guy.

 

[Raoul]

Didn't Obama drop more bombs than any other president in his time?

I would imagine he has to be near the top of the list given that he inherited two wars in full effect when he took over the Presidency.

 

[freeurmind]

Did he inherit Libya? Yemen?

 

[Raoul]

Did he inherit Libya? Yemen?

Libya was a NATO affair and Yemen has been an Al-Qaeda stronghold for some time, so you could say yes he did.

 

[Beachryan]

Wow, some serious high bars being set on here. Is any President perfect? Do they make every decision correctly when viewed with hindsight? Of course not.

That job (until the way Trump handles it) is impossible. Every 5 minutes you have to make a decision on a topic you've never heard of, often with massive consequences. Then 5 minutes later you need to be mentally ready to do it again.

All you can hope for is someone human, who is smart enough to know who to rely on, who to oppose and who to ignore. A bonus is being able to be a positive force both in country and the world.

Did he make mistakes in the Middle East? Of course. Find me a leader in history who hasn't. As his former advisor, Ben Rhodes likes to say: the time we intervened in the middle east it was the worst decision. The time we didn't intervene it was the worst decision. It's almost like the Middle East has and will always be a chaotic region regardless of if the West even notices.

As for his economic policies: look at any chart of indicators before and through his time. Seems like he did alright. Should have jailed some bankers, of course.

For me, for someone who had to make 20 decisions a day more crucial than any ill ever make in my life, his batting average was okay. And better than most.

 

[Raoul]

Wow, some serious high bars being set on here. Is any President perfect? Do they make every decision correctly when viewed with hindsight? Of course not.

That job (until the way Trump handles it) is impossible. Every 5 minutes you have to make a decision on a topic you've never heard of, often with massive consequences. Then 5 minutes later you need to be mentally ready to do it again.

All you can hope for is someone human, who is smart enough to know who to rely on, who to oppose and who to ignore. A bonus is being able to be a positive force both in country and the world.

Did he make mistakes in the Middle East? Of course. Find me a leader in history who hasn't. As his former advisor, Ben Rhodes likes to say: the time we intervened in the middle east it was the worst decision. The time we didn't intervene it was the worst decision. It's almost like the Middle East has and will always be a chaotic region regardless of if the West even notices.

As for his economic policies: look at any chart of indicators before and through his time. Seems like he did alright. Should have jailed some bankers, of course.

For me, for someone who had to make 20 decisions a day more crucial than any ill ever make in my life, his batting average was okay. And better than most.

This is pretty much the crux of it, especially for large states like the US. Intervene and risk being labeled a warmonger by the fringes. Don't intervene and risk being labelled an enabler of genocide by all others. It's a losing proposition to some degree irrespective of what choice you make.

 

[adexkola]

I've said this earlier in this thread but if you think he's horrible like all other presidents then fair enough. On a relative basis he's done well compared to most of his predecessors

 

[Sweet Square]

Wow, some serious high bars being set on here. Is any President perfect? Do they make every decision correctly when viewed with hindsight? Of course not.

That job S is impossible. Every 5 minutes you have to make a decision on a topic you've never heard of, often with massive consequences. Then 5 minutes later you need to be mentally ready to do it again.

All you can hope for is someone human, who is smart enough to know who to rely on, who to oppose and who to ignore. A bonus is being able to be a positive force both in country and the world.

Did he make mistakes in the Middle East? Of course. Find me a leader in history who hasn't. As his former advisor, Ben Rhodes likes to say: the time we intervened in the middle east it was the worst decision. The time we didn't intervene it was the worst decision. It's almost like the Middle East has and will always be a chaotic region regardless of if the West even notices.

As for his economic policies: look at any chart of indicators before and through his time. Seems like he did alright. Should have jailed some bankers, of course.

For me, for someone who had to make 20 decisions a day more crucial than any ill ever make in my life, his batting average was okay. And better than most.

Ah there's that good old liberal racism.


Its honestly quite depressing that for a lot people, their dislike of Trump has nothing to be with his policies or actions but by the way Trump presents himself.

 

[freeurmind]

Libya was a NATO affair and Yemen has been an Al-Qaeda stronghold for some time, so you could say yes he did.

Ah yes because the US has absolutely no say in what NATO does. Obama himself says he regrets what happened in Libya. Samantha Power has admitted they should have pushed far more for a diplomatic solution. Of course its not your country that sits in ruins so I can see why you would not care.

 

[Raoul]

Ah yes because the US has absolutely no say in what NATO does. Obama himself says he regrets what happened in Libya. Samantha Power has admitted they should have pushed far more for a diplomatic solution. Of course its not your country that sits in ruins so I can see why you would not care.

It would be sitting in ruins in either case since Qaddafi was on the ropes after the Arab spring. Also, the French were far more involved in the Libya campaign, which is not something that can be credited to Obama, who correctly opted for more of a support role.

 

[Raoul]

I've said this earlier in this thread but if you think he's horrible like all other presidents then fair enough. On a relative basis he's done well compared to most of his predecessors

He’s done better than most, especially after inheriting an economy in freefall and reorienting a full recovery (which is still ongoing today). Foreign policy wise he was much weaker imo, especially since he ran on an irrational bring the troops home platform and quickly found out that the complexities of doing that were far more difficult than campaign slogans. He failed massively in Russia and did a poor job in avoiding the conditions that led to the formation of ISIS. He wasn’t nearly forceful enough in either front because he was forced into feckless inaction in order to not rock the boat in the lead up to the 2012 elections.

 

[Abizzz]

Wow, some serious high bars being set on here. Is any President perfect? Do they make every decision correctly when viewed with hindsight? Of course not.

That job (until the way Trump handles it) is impossible. Every 5 minutes you have to make a decision on a topic you've never heard of, often with massive consequences. Then 5 minutes later you need to be mentally ready to do it again.

The job of US President is emphatically not impossible. He had all the resources (money and brains) to delegate wherever he needed to. If he kept making decisions every 5 mins about things he has never heard he either needed to hear of more things or find people who have heard of them. As we see with Trump the president has a certain ability to form the presidency. He says he had to decide on drone strikes because he had to bear the responsibility, but in reality he was the only one who could never be found responsible for anything because of his office.

All you can hope for is someone human, who is smart enough to know who to rely on, who to oppose and who to ignore. A bonus is being able to be a positive force both in country and the world.

Did he make mistakes in the Middle East? Of course. Find me a leader in history who hasn't. As his former advisor, Ben Rhodes likes to say: the time we intervened in the middle east it was the worst decision. The time we didn't intervene it was the worst decision. It's almost like the Middle East has and will always be a chaotic region regardless of if the West even notices.

As for his economic policies: look at any chart of indicators before and through his time. Seems like he did alright. Should have jailed some bankers, of course.

For me, for someone who had to make 20 decisions a day more crucial than any ill ever make in my life, his batting average was okay. And better than most.

My other main grip with him is that he tackled non of the topics he raised in "Audacity of hope". He raised our hopes so high and delivered nothing. No justice reform, no gun reform, no school reform the list goes on and on. We kept being told his hands were tied but Trump can suddenly do whatever the feck he wants despite his hands being tied too.


That said I'd take him over McCain again any day of the week.

 

[freeurmind]

Compare how Bush and Trump delivered for the Republican base to Obamas constant non action or "compromising" on so many issues that his base cared about.

 

[Raoul]

Compare how Bush and Trump delivered for the Republican base to Obamas constant non action or "compromising" on so many issues that his base cared about.

The same Dem base you cite re-elected him by a comfortable margin, so maybe that logic is a bit off.

 

[Red Dreams]

The same Dem base you cite re-elected him by a comfortable margin, so maybe that logic is a bit off.

likeabilty.

 

[freeurmind]

The same Dem base you cite re-elected him by a comfortable margin, so maybe that logic is a bit off.

Compare the turnout and margin of victory in those 2 elections. Thats not even mentioning the disaster of 2014.

 

[Rado_N]

The same Dem base you cite re-elected him by a comfortable margin, so maybe that logic is a bit off.

Not really.

Obama, like most Dems, was stupidly obsessed with bipartisanship.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

Not really.

Obama, like most Dems, was stupidly obsessed with bipartisanship.

I think, to a certain degree, that was due to them already being boxed in by a more effective communication strategy from the GOP.

Obama’s presidency is just a huge waste of opportunity. It was fairly clear that a self professed Tom Friedman’s disciple wouldn’t rock the boat institutionally, but he had a mandate at the start and with a more populist and punitive course of action he could have done some genuine good.

Ultimately, in hindsight, he wasn’t a strong character (feckless, as the GOP loved to say). From the financial crisis response, his own healthcare plan to senate filibuster on appointing new judges to marriage equality to activist issues like BLM or Dakota Pipeline or mass shooting/gun violence, he never lead and was content to pay lip service or quietly engage in backroom dealing. Decent man, bit of an empty suit.

 

[Beachryan]

Ah there's that good old liberal racism.


Its honestly quite depressing that for a lot people, their dislike of Trump has nothing to be with his policies or actions but by the way Trump presents himself.

Listen if you want to talk points let's get to it, but attacking the line that the middle east is in constantly in conflict as racist is like saying I'm being racist when I say water is wet.

Trump has no consistent policies, and his actions are determined by whoever last influenced him, or what he last saw on fox.

 

[Nucks]

Yeah he was very enthusiastic about killing people by remote control.

https://www.cfr.org/blog/obamas-final-drone-strike-data



He isn't a good guy.

This is silliness.

Obama is a product of emerging technology. I'm going to give you a stat, I don't even need to look it up, and I know it's true.

Bush used more drone strikes than Clinton. Obama used more drone strikes than Bush. Trump, if he wins a 2nd term, will use more drone strikes than Obama if he hasn't already, and it's likely he already has surpassed Obama. Whoever comes after Trump, will use more drone strikes than Trump unless there is a radical change in foreign policy.

Want to know why? It is a new technology that is being integrated into the military. That means, Obama had access to more, and better drones than Bush. Bush had access to more and better than Clinton. Trump will have access to more than Obama.

I have absolutely no issue with the methodology of using drones instead of pilots. The issue I have, is that because Drones are more covert, and the risk is much lower due to no actual pilot involved, the bar has been lowered on what the government is willing to do regarding carrying out airstrikes. However, make no mistake about it, the same sort of horse trading would go on about bombing a house full of people, weighing up the "collateral" damage versus the benefit of killing maybe a bad guy, whether or not it's a guy sitting in Nevada piloting a drone, or it's a pilot flying 35,000 feet above the house if the target was deemed valuable enough.

 

[Abizzz]

This is silliness.

Obama is a product of emerging technology. I'm going to give you a stat, I don't even need to look it up, and I know it's true.

Bush used more drone strikes than Clinton. Obama used more drone strikes than Bush. Trump, if he wins a 2nd term, will use more drone strikes than Obama if he hasn't already, and it's likely he already has surpassed Obama. Whoever comes after Trump, will use more drone strikes than Trump unless there is a radical change in foreign policy.

Want to know why? It is a new technology that is being integrated into the military. That means, Obama had access to more, and better drones than Bush. Bush had access to more and better than Clinton. Trump will have access to more than Obama.

I have absolutely no issue with the methodology of using drones instead of pilots. The issue I have, is that because Drones are more covert, and the risk is much lower due to no actual pilot involved, the bar has been lowered on what the government is willing to do regarding carrying out airstrikes. However, make no mistake about it, the same sort of horse trading would go on about bombing a house full of people, weighing up the "collateral" damage versus the benefit of killing maybe a bad guy, whether or not it's a guy sitting in Nevada piloting a drone, or it's a pilot flying 35,000 feet above the house if the target was deemed valuable enough.

... I think you misunderstood me. I would equally criticize him if he had used b52s to eliminate 4000 people in foreign countries (their official figure, it's probably multiples of it in reality). What other president ordered 540 bombing missions in countries the US wasn't at war with?

He even jokes about not losing any sleep over it. Even if most of the people he had killed were really terrorists he still killed hundreds of kids and innocents and doesn't even care much. He made it normal. Now it's normal and Trump is president.


And saying he is a product of emerging technology is a joke. So was the use of sarin gas... did that make it right?

 

[Florida Man]

Compare how Bush and Trump delivered for the Republican base to Obamas constant non action or "compromising" on so many issues that his base cared about.

Liberals being pussies isn’t a stereotype for no reason. I had to read some bullshit by a whole gang of them on Instagram because some video was seemingly making fun of Marco Rubio for being shit at college before his Miami days. Really can’t stand those who think we can hand hold with Republicans and accomplish the goals needed.

 

[Kentonio]

Mediocre president who made some incredibly naive mistakes at times both politically and in foreign policy, had to deal with some really shitty events that were beyond his control, was constrained by being the first black president and who did a good job of dealing with that pressure, and whose legacy is lifted by his incredible charisma and charm.

Very much a mixed bag. Ran as a progressive but governed as a centrist. Wasted his congressional majority by believing he could be bi-partisan in the face of a GOP who clearly hated him. Promised a lot for racial equality but was unable to deliver much ironically due to his own race. Promised transparency and certainly didn’t deliver on that.

Probably a C+ rating all things considered, although his inspiring personality and effect he had on a world sick of Bush will probably have him considered higher. Especially considering what followed him.

 

[2cents]

Did he make mistakes in the Middle East? Of course. Find me a leader in history who hasn't. As his former advisor, Ben Rhodes likes to say: the time we intervened in the middle east it was the worst decision. The time we didn't intervene it was the worst decision. It's almost like the Middle East has and will always be a chaotic region regardless of if the West even notices

That’s such a self-serving cop-out typical of Rhodes who now spends his days on Twitter pontificating about conflicts in which he is deeply implicated.

 

[berbatrick]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/11/22/barack-obama-conservative/?arc404=true

 

[Nucks]

... I think you misunderstood me. I would equally criticize him if he had used b52s to eliminate 4000 people in foreign countries (their official figure, it's probably multiples of it in reality). What other president ordered 540 bombing missions in countries the US wasn't at war with?

He even jokes about not losing any sleep over it. Even if most of the people he had killed were really terrorists he still killed hundreds of kids and innocents and doesn't even care much. He made it normal. Now it's normal and Trump is president.


And saying he is a product of emerging technology is a joke. So was the use of sarin gas... did that make it right?

Not really a good analogy re sarin.

If you want to talk about basic criminality, then we're going back to at least FDR before we can find a President who shouldn't, clearly, have been tried for some sort of war crime, and even FDR is debatable.

It's an odd hill to pick, you note that you'd criticize him for b52's, but that is the point isn't it. You clearly said drones, like somehow, using a Drone to blow people up, is somehow more reprehensible than using a B2, or an F-117, or a B52. Obama inherited a complete shit show, anyone in office would have done similar, and it's nothing new.

What other President ordered 540 bombings in countries the US wasn't at war with? Johnson and Nixon. Off the top of my head, they ordered over 500,000 sorties in Laos and Nixon dropped more ordinance on Cambodia (that's more than 540 bombings), than they did on Japan in WW2.

The point I am making is, it's an odd thing to criticize Obama for, it's the status-quo, normal, business as usual. You should be indicting the entire system, not cherry picking one buzz topic 'drones'. IMO anyways.

 

[Sweet Square]

This explain a lot.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

https://www.businessinsider.com/obama-compared-isis-to-the-joker-2016-3

 

[Eboue]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[adexkola]

I'm coming around to the view of the opposite side on this issue.

 

[The Firestarter]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

After that book advance, their values certainly aligned more.

 

[shamans]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[freeurmind]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Who the feck does this guy think he's kidding?

 

[shamans]

Who the feck does this guy think he's kidding?

I was pretty shocked to read this honestly. For Obama to talk about drones in this sort of manner is very sad. It's how I would talk about myself after crushing some fast food "part of me wanted to stay fit but nahhh".

Funny what's accepted in the world and what isn't.