Obama to Bernie supporters: Don't let disillusionment set in

[bigtree]

from Greg Sargent at WaPo Plum Line:




Any day now, some very prominent Democrats will get down to the business of helping to unite the party behind likely nominee Hillary Clinton. One of them will be President Barack Obama, who is popular among young Democrats and thus well positioned to argue to Bernie Sanders supporters that it in their interests — and the interests of the larger Sanders movement — to support Clinton.

The President is set to give a speech at Rutgers University next week, at which (given the audience) he might begin to lay out this case. And in an interview with The Daily Targum, a student paper at Rutgers, he offered a long monologue that is perhaps a preview of the bigger argument he’ll make...

"...some of the steps that we’ve taken are going to pay off over the course of the next 20 years. There are things like raising the federal minimum wage or rebuilding our infrastructure — that would put people back to work right away and that would accelerate growth….

“If we are changing just a few laws that make it easier, for example, for workers to organize, that close corporate tax loopholes or tax loopholes used by wealthy individuals so that they’re not paying their fair share — if we take that money and make sure that we’re investing in the kinds of things that make an economy grow, if we ensure that we’ve got a healthcare system that is affordable and accessible for all people, then I’m confident that America’s best days are still ahead….

“We have to make sure we also recognize this is a big country, and there’s very rarely a single set of silver bullets out there that would immediately solve all of these problems. We’re part of an interconnected global economy now, and there’s no going back from that. It’s important for us to not oversimplify how we’re going to bring about the kind of change we need.

“We’ve got to also recognize that, in a democracy like this, it’s not going to happen overnight. We have to make incremental changes where we can, and everyone once in a while you’ll get a breakthrough and make the kind of big changes that are necessary. That consensus building is important because that’s historically how change has happened in America. Those are the kinds of things that I’ll be talking about at the commencement.”

This is both a subtle rebuke to Sanders’s call for a revolution and a preview of the argument he’ll likely make in urging his supporters to get behind Clinton. Obama’s warning against oversimplification is an implicit criticism of Sanders’s suggestion that liberating lawmakers from the grip of plutocratic money and rallying millions to storm the ramparts of Congress would compel the sort of far reaching, transformative social democratic reforms that Sanders envisions — single payer, free public college, enormously ambitious action on to combat climate change.

More to the point, though, Obama is previewing an argument he’ll likely make against allowing unrealistic assessments of what is possible to morph into political disillusionment. Here Obama makes the case that change has historically been won in a long, hard, incremental slog, and that the big breakthroughs are historically very rare. There is a lot to this: throughout the progressive era, gains in the areas of economic regulation, the minimum wage, and the graduated income tax proceeded fitfully and with great difficulty, suffering big setbacks in the courts. It took decades until a horrific depression and landslide electoral wins for Democrats helped lead to the big New Deal sea changes, which included the Supreme Court upholding (among other things) wage floors, unemployment insurance and social insurance for the elderly. Yet even Social Security had to be subsequently expanded many years later to cover millions who’d been excluded from it...

As the above remarks indicate, Obama will likely make the case against being dismissive of the incremental changes that Hillary Clinton has promised to pursue...

To be clear, none of this is to denigrate Bernie Sanders’s ambitions. Indeed, I hope that Obama will make a genuine effort to acknowledge the force of Sanders’s big argument — his insistence that the constraints of our political system, however real the obstacles they pose, ultimately should not cause us to scale back our idealized vision of a far more fair economy and just society. I also hope he’ll make the case to Sanders’s supporters that they have an important role to play in trying to pull Clinton and the Democratic Party towards them on their issues and in trying to erect a bulwark in Congress against any caves to regressive centrist deal-making. If the goal is to prevent disillusionment from setting in, those might serve as two key pieces of the argument.


read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/05/12/obama-to-bernie-supporters-dont-let-disillusionment-set-in/?postshare=8621463097862229&tid=ss_tw

[Larkspur]

1. I prefer Frederick Douglas to wishy washy Obama

"Power gives up nothing without a fight, never has, never will."

I'll hold my nose and vote for HRC in the GE, assuming she is our nominee, but she will get no peace from me the nanosecond she wins the GE. HRC is nothing but the lesser of 2 evils for me and can not be trusted.

Progressive groups also need to put pressure on HRC and all her superdelegates the nanosecond after she wins the GE.

[BeyondGeography]

3. He beat the Republicans twice in a national election

Last edited Fri May 13, 2016, 10:39 AM - Edit history (1)

and then he raised Mitt Romney's taxes after he beat his ass. Frederick Douglass would have broke his hands clapping. Wake the fuck up.

[Larkspur]

5. Obama allowed the criminals on Wall Street to go free

and caved into Joe Lieberman over the public option.
And the Middle Class is still in decline under Obama, who favors free trade deals that will further diminish the middle class.

[BootinUp]

7. +1 for effort

[Kelvin Mace]

8. I wonder how much Frederick Douglass would applaud Obama's policy

of waging continuous warfare against people of color. Would he have approved of perpetuating a white man's illegal invasion of a sovereign nation over lies? I wonder how he would feel about the use of drones in order commit extra-judicial killing of U.S. citizens without due process? How about all those dead woman and children we killed "by accident"? How about the MSF hospital we destroyed, killing dozens?

I also have to wonder how he would feel about Obama championing trade deals which perpetuate economic enslavement of the poor?

[Jitter65]

35. Isn't Douglas dead? nt

[Kelvin Mace]

36. Well, now you bring up one of those technicalities that

tend to upset people making these kinds of arguments.

[snowy owl]

42. So are the Founding Fathers. So...?

[CorkySt.Clair]

21. "He beat the Republicans twice in a national election"

And that's why the fringe left hates him. He's a winner. They lose at everything.

[BeyondGeography]

23. Then they call him a wimp

You have to walk through fire to get to the White House. It's mind numbing.

[CorkySt.Clair]

24. Agreed.

Obama is, has been and always will be a brave human being.

It's one of the many traits I admire.

Sad some here don't respect what it took for him to get where he is. But they have no fucking clue about politics or policy, so no surprise they don't get it.

[snowy owl]

43. Having skills at oratory got him elected. Nice if he knew what the words meant in real time.

And worked to bring them to life. Promises made; promises broken.

[BeyondGeography]

61. Nothing but speeches! Nice RW talking point.

Obama won 11 of 12 battleground states in 2012 because he is an organizational genius, not because he is good at stringing pretty words together. He re-wrote the rules on turning out likely D voters for the GE by investing very heavily in analytics, hiring the best people he could find and integrating data with his own messaging to a degree that had never been done before. Romney really was stunned on election night.

Obama also helped Bill Clinton win Chicago big in 1992 with his hands-on leadership of the city's Democratic GOTV effort. He knows D voters inside-out, including their penchant for sitting on their asses during midterms (which you surely blame on him) and then bitching non-stop about the consequences. He knows it's a marathon. You don't.

[VulgarPoet]

18. This.

I'll hold my nose and vote for HRC in the GE, assuming she is our nominee, but she will get no peace from me the nanosecond she wins the GE. HRC is nothing but the lesser of 2 evils for me and can not be trusted.

This until the day she's primaried. I've got no love for her or her barely-better-than-a-neocon fiscal policy, her "we're going to annihilate Iran" policy, her inability to play by FOIA, or her "we need a Manhattan project against encryption" bullshit, and it'll take a miracle and a half for me to believe for a second that she's going to actually pivot to democratic policy.

[mcar]

37. Oh brother!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Sadly I suspect many BS supporters don't care for PBO either. Because

It is easy to stand on the sidelines and point.

[bigtree]

11. this thread is like an ODS trigger

...this is the polarization the Sanders campaign has fostered, deliberately.

That effort has been like manure to flies for republican operatives, as well.

[snowy owl]

44. Barack Obama is no Theodore Roosevelt or Franklin D. for that matter.

And he could have been. He had thirteen bankers standing before him. He could have struck like lightening. But he didn't. And they left with less respect for him.

[democrattotheend]

69. I am still a big supporter of the President

And if he could run for a third term, I'd be really torn between him and Bernie.

FWIW, all of the Sanders volunteers I worked with in New York felt the same way - we were all sad that Obama's presidency is almost over.

Remember, a lot (probably most) of the people who support Bernie now supported Obama in 2008.

[Kelvin Mace]

4. Kind of late

Disillusionment set in when Obama appointed Rahm as his chief of staff, then refused to prosecute Wall Street or the Bush administration.

The Democratic Party had a choice between genuine change or a continuation of the Bush-Clinton Dynasty.

They made their choice and will have to live with the results.

[kstewart33]

74. I'm sure that President Obama is losing sleep over that.

[Kelvin Mace]

75. No, he's not.

He leaves the White House now and will be rewarded by these people beyond the dreams of avarice.

[ibegurpard]

6. Obama is one of the reasons

For that disillusionment. TPP is a prime example.

[AzDar]

49. ^ This.

[BootinUp]

9. Anger and disillusionment are SETBACKS folks. Incremental is the only way. nt

[tk2kewl]

12. Incremental is the only way

Everything important happens in giant leaps forward

http://www.historyextra.com/feature/12-giant-leaps-mankind

[BootinUp]

15. Did you read the article btw?

[forjusticethunders]

16. Incrementalism > Outcrementalism

Though I call it more of a snowball theory of politics. Remember when gay equality was a political third rail? Remember when 3 election cycles ago marriage discrimination amendments drove turnout that reelected George W Bush? Now we're at a point where Obama is to trans equality what Eisenhower and JFK were to black people.

Of course, the usual suspects will poo-poo this as "identity politics".

[BootinUp]

17. Of course. And we all understand the frustation too. nt

[snowy owl]

45. No, clinton is the setback. Wait and see . . . unless she learns from Bernie.

Looks like she already has on childcare.

[BootinUp]

48. I don't care who claims what idea, the primary process works nt

[disillusioned73]

10. "disillusionment"??

Too late for that Mr. President.. I've been there for YEARS now, I will continue to pull to the left.

[ThePhilosopher04]

13. That bridge was crossed a long time ago.

Spare us the bullshit. The only hope for a true, progressive America is to vote Bernie Sanders or someone with his vision who will carry the flag in his honor.

[Skwmom]

14. It reminds me of his campaign speeches. And Clinton was right - He is no different than her.

[bigtree]

19. kick

[Dems to Win]

20. Obama mocks people who want to have a pension

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/04/why-must-trump-alternative-be-self-satisfied-complacent-democrats by Thomas Frank

Obama has said similar things often in these waning months of his presidency. In a recent interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times, he went even farther, brushing off criticism of his administration as cranky griping by people who had been left behind by history. He had helped institute “hard changes,” he recollected, that made the economy more “nimble” and “dynamic”. Unfortunately, he continued:

That then feeds, both on the left and the right, a temptation to say, ‘If we could just go back to an era in which our borders were closed,’ or ‘If we could just go back to a time when everybody had a defined-benefit plan,’ or ‘We could just go back to a time when there wasn’t any immigrant that was taking my job, things would be OK.’

Perhaps you noticed something peculiar about that statement, reader: that President Obama has here lumped together two complaints that sound absurd and vaguely racist with a third impulse – a longing for defined-benefit pension plans – that is legitimate and quite real. As it happens, we know who wants to get everybody into a defined-benefit pension plan: organized labor, a big Democratic constituency for whom such plans, in which benefits do not fluctuate like stocks, are a common demand. Social Security is another example of such a plan.

Defined-benefit plans really exist. Millions of people count on them as a bulwark of middle-class security. Yes, Republicans have attacked defined-benefit plans for years, and such plans have become increasingly rare for younger workers, but instead of fighting back, here’s our liberal president brushing it all off as pie-in-the-sky whining by soreheads.

If people are not disillusioned, they are not paying attention.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

26. Doesn't Obama have a defined-benefit retirement plan, with healthcare thrown in?

He got his.

Clintons got theirs.

Stop whining, peons.

[Dems to Win]

31. "Stop whining, peons, and Trudge up that Hill"

Don't see how we can lose with that message.

[snowy owl]

47. So, so true. I hope Warren will get pension plans protected again and out of company "assets"

That was the destrution of pension plans. After all, CEO's get wall street pension plans so why not workers?

[imagine2015]

22. So in 20 years Obama says we might make some badly needed changes. How inspiring.

""...some of the steps that we’ve taken are going to pay off over the course of the next 20 years. There are things like raising the federal minimum wage or rebuilding our infrastructure — that would put people back to work right away and that would accelerate growth….

it’s not going to happen overnight. We have to make incremental changes where we can, and everyone once in a while you’ll get a breakthrough and make the kind of big changes that are necessary. That consensus building is important because that’s historically how change has happened in America."

Really? How was a national consensus arrived at to end slavery?

[snowy owl]

41. "of the next 20 years," our fixes will always be twenty years behind...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

25. Centrist endorses Centrist and scolds progressives. But, this time it will be different!

Or, perhaps, some day it will be different. Maybe. Time will tell. Eat your peas.

[Kittycat]

27. How did you get unblocked?

[Rebkeh]

28. I love the president, but I disagree with him here

No change is going to stick until we change the structural issues that support the problems to begin with. It's like fixing broken windows of a house when its foundation is shaky - it doesn't make sense to focus on the windows. Furthermore, smaller fixes are easy to unravel and there are too many republicans chomping at the bit to destroy anything democrats aim to accomplish.

I am fine with smaller changes, what I have a problem with is smaller changes to the exclusion of bigger ones. Why does it have to be either/or? The reasons are many but that's a whole 'nother thread.

[ebayfool]

66. Perfect response, Rebkeh. I totally agree.

But Prez Obama backing her is going to leave a stain on him. Taking her on for SoS was a wicked-bad mistake. She mushroomed from that office.

[Rebkeh]

67. I can't blame him for wanting to protect, not only his legacy,

but the long term plan he set in motion. That's a natural response and I do not fault him for that.

This does not mean I will vote the way he'd like me to.

[ebayfool]

68. Agreed, again.

I just wish ... well, a lot of things. Top of the list - no Debbie Wassermann Schultz heading the DNC and no Clinton in Sec of State. But (before anyone else states the obvious!) wish in one hand and @$&%$ in the other ...

[highprincipleswork]

29. If Democrats act as tepid and reactionary as they seem to be signaling, they will not defeat Trump

IMHO.

[aikoaiko]

30. I wish the president would stop interfering with the primaries.

And here is the big lie in the this piece: "To be clear, none of this is to denigrate Bernie Sanders’s ambitions."

What utter bullshit.

Of course he is right that incremental change is better than no change, but we need more punctuated equilibrium after 8 years of incremental change.

[AtomicKitten]

39. Too late. Disillusionment has already pitched a tent.

Pres Obama was masterful at running as a progressive. The problem is that he governed like a right-leaning centrist. There is no misunderstanding when it comes to Hillary. I will not be spoon-fed horseshit, not even from Pres Obama.

[snowy owl]

50. Even in education, he was center-right. Surrounded himself with corporatists.

That's the difference between him and Bernie. Bernie looks for honest people. Not corporatists. Why don't Clinton supporters get that?

[liberal from boston]

71. Go Bernie

Lawrence O'Donnell interviewed Michael Moore about his movie "Where To Invade next". It is worth watching --Bernie, Hillary, Trump & Primary are discussed. It is a 10 minute interview.

http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/michael-moore-donald-trump-s-playing-on-fear-685398595951

[CharlotteVale]

32. His speeches stopped working on me a long time ago.

[oasis]

33. When the call goes out , "all hands on deck" the crew

responds immediately. Those not part of the crew can get lost as far as I'm concerned.

[riderinthestorm]

34. I really like this President but climate change can't wait for incrementalism

And he knows it.



His deliberate erasure of the looming catastrophe in his comments is shameful.

[Agony]

38. "ambitious" is the word you were looking for...

"enormously ambitious action on to combat climate change"
FFS it is pathetic for a Democrat to denigrate Sanders efforts to move the dial to "critical" on climate change action.

[snowy owl]

40. Nice try. Sounds like Obama campaigning again. Time for angry white guy.

I would have never voted republican but I had so much more belief that he would at least try to be the man he campaigned being. I finally understand that the first Black President had to be mild, unconfrontative, and lack passion for the job. Ok. Now we need an angry white guy. Somebody who will take over the reins and demand more. Obama's incrementalism is simply a way to justify his own lethargic leadership. He managed to fulfill those areas he wanted most: healthcare for people like his mother who was denied it and Lily Ledbetter - social justice. No, his administration for six years was very centrist-right. Even soc. security was on the table. Nice he's become a little more demanding in his last couple of years but his rhetoric isn't the same this time around. Been there and done that with him already. He has so sold out. Incrementalism? Get real. Besides, we've endured enough hawks, thank you.

[Buns_of_Fire]

46. He's doing as he should, as head of the party.

But I'm wondering how this attitude is supposed to bring about even incremental change:

I don't see it. It's one thing to try for change, and fall short of getting all you want given the political realities. It's a damned sight different to refuse to try at all.

She'll busy herself picking out new drapes as the whole damned house burns to the ground. And sadly, I don't think she's committed to doing even that much.

[Lodestar]

51. No illusions, here. Just the cold hard truth...n/t

[snowy owl]

52. Bigtree: Your disallusionment is yet to come. You'll be looking for Sanders in four years.

[Bluenorthwest]

53. In 2008 part of Obama's 'think small, slow progress' policy was opposing marriage equality

and he and his surrogates would go on and on about civil unions and pragmatism and how things take decades and lots more injustices have to happen before any corrections can be made because change does not serve those who are currently being served and they really like being served.
So it's hard for me to get on board with the slow change train. It's an excuse for mediocrity and nothing more.

[TrueDemVA]

54. This Bernie supporter to the President

You're part of the club, so when I hear something about coming together to support Hillary, it's tough to take you seriously. Sorry, but I want the only Democrat running to be nominated and that's Bernie.

Okay, Hillary supporters...1..2...3... ATTACK!!!

Be gentle with me

[wendylaroux]

58. I know right? how gd stupid does he think we are,

in no way,shape or form am I listening to anything this guy says.

fools me once ,shame on me,fool me twice,we ya aint gonna fool me twice.

[Kall]

55. Incremental Change You Can Believe In.

Maybe that's the slogan she should run with. At a time of 25% right-track, 67% wrong track numbers for the country, what could go wrong.

[coffeeAM]

56. Says the corporate establishment Democrat.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. Ok I admit this year unity tour will be fun to watch

since many voters have their eyes completely open to the triangulation, third way, incrementalism.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Should be a hoot.

[wendylaroux]

59. It will be magnificent!!!! lol, Can not wait either!

[seekthetruth]

60. I respect the need to be civil towards those who want incremental change...

.....but these days we need a sledgehammer to fight those with money and power to prevent those necessary changes.

[Fumesucker]

62. Exactly, don't be disillusioned by a candidate who will say anything and change nothing

I've got a peaceful easy feeling

And I know you won't let me down

'Cause I'm already standing on the ground

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/obama-hillary-w.html

"Hillary Clinton. She’ll say anything, and change nothing. It’s time to turn the page. Paid for by Obama for America."

[840high]

63. Obama was so right.

[Mnpaul]

64. That statement

works in more than one way.

[BootinUp]

70. It really does! But in the Bern bubble that's prolly not too clear. nt

[Mnpaul]

73. Oh it's very clear

I was thinking of his Alan Simpson pick to head up the deficit commission

[whatchamacallit]

79. Haha good Eagles use

[AgingAmerican]

65. It's set in under your presidency, sir

Long before Bernie announced

[LuvLoogie]

76. The Revolution is like a Space Colonist movement pissed off at NASA

Where's my Zero G!

[Nye Bevan]

77. I know I'm in a small minority here, but I like and respect President Obama.

Anyone who hates the Obama presidency will probably hate the Hillary presidency.

[NurseJackie]

80. +1

[whatchamacallit]

78. So much spin and projected nonsense