My, my, my...how times change.
Posted on 08/24/2015 3:31:52 AM PDT by Din Maker
Jeff Greenfield has a thoughtful piece in Politico dealing with President Obama’s political legacy, and how the party he leads has gone precipitously downhill since he took office.
When you move from policy to politics, the task is a lot simpler—just measure the clout of the president’s party when he took office and when he left it. By that measure, Obama’s six years have been terrible.
Under Obama, the party started strong. “When Obama was elected in 2008, Democrats were at a high water mark,” says David Axelrod, who served as one of Obama’s top strategists. “Driven by antipathy to George W. Bush and then the Obama wave, Democrats had enjoyed two banner elections in ’06 and ’08. We won dozens of improbable congressional elections in states and districts that normally would tack Republican, and that effect trickled down to other offices. You add to that the fact that we would take office in the midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression, and it was apparent, from Day One, that we had nowhere to go but down.”
The first signs of the slowly unfolding debacle that has meant the decimation of the Democratic Party nationally began early—with the special election of Scott Brown to Ted Kennedy’s empty Senate seat in Massachusetts. That early loss, even though the seat was won back eventually by Elizabeth Warren, presaged the 2010 midterms, which saw the loss of 63 House and six Senate seats. It was disaster that came as no surprise to the White House, but also proved a signal of what was to come.
The party’s record over the past six years has made clear that when Barack Obama leaves office in January 2017 the Democratic Party will have ceded vast sections of the country to Republicans, and will be left with a weak bench of high-level elected officials. It is, in fact, so bleak a record that even if the Democrats hold the White House and retake the Senate in 2016, the party’s wounds will remain deep and enduring, threatening the enactment of anything like a “progressive” agenda across much of the nation and eliminating nearly a decade’s worth of rising stars who might help strengthen the party in elections ahead.
While the Senate is definitely in play in 2016, the GOP has a virtual lock on the House at least until 2020 and perhaps beyond. The last round of redistricting was mostly favorable to Republicans and has given them an enormous advantage in state legislatures across the country. Republicans now control 70% of upper and lower chambers nationwide and 31 governorships. Fully 24 states have a GOP governor, and Republican upper and lower houses.
One of the consequences of so few Democrats in state government is that the pool of promising candidates for federal office is vastly reduced. Hence, the Democratic Party has now become a party of candidates all eligible for Social Security:
Eight years later, when he leaves office in 2017 at 55, he’ll actually be one of the party’s only leaders not eligible for Social Security. Even as the party has recently captured more young voters at the ballot box in presidential elections, its leaders are increasingly of an entirely different generation; most of the party’s leaders will fade from the national scene in the years ahead. Its two leading presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are 67 and 73. The sitting vice president, Joe Biden, is 72. The Democratic House leader, Nancy Pelosi, is 75; House Whip Steny Hoyer is 76 and caucus Chair James Clyburn is 75, as is Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, who will retire next year. It’s a party that will be turning to a new generation of leaders in the coming years—and yet, there are precious few looking around the nation’s state houses, U.S. House or Senate seats.
In truth, President Obama did not pay particular attention to building the Democratic Party during his time in office. His own re-election took precedence in his first term, and legacy building has occupied his attention in his second. Then there is the fact that his approval in many congressional districts that aren’t deep, deep blue meant that he would have done more harm than good in appearing beside a candidate.
The Republicans are in much better shape generationally, but the civil war wracking the party now threatens to rend the GOP asunder. And it appears that no matter who is the nominee for president, a whole lot of people are going to be bitterly disappointed.
When Obama leaves office, it is possible that Republicans will be in no better shape than Democrats.
Second it.
Had the Dems thrown him under the bus in 2012, they wouldn’t be in this spot.
Its why the Uniparty couldn't care less about state level elections. As for congress, the GOP wing of the Uniparty is more than happy to illegally forfeit their powers as long as the perks and $ keep flowing.
I see where the writer failed to connect the dots.
I know they want to be called progressives but, they just recycle the failed dogma of government knows best. They love for the common man to recycle resources while they amass the wealth of labor through the abuse of power.
How about the democratic party was happily taken over by the communist party, the muslims and anyone else who would contribute to thier bank account
UNIPARTY. How fitting and appropriate.
My, my, my...how times change.
What the country needs is a second party. The Republicrats are in firm control of the country and the Boehner/Pelosi and Reid/McConnell teams are assuring the continued decay of the country and the enrichment of the ruling political elites.
First Trump has to win the nomination, and last time I checked it’s a loooooonnnngggggg way to February.
Obama was one crackup after another. Americans sensed he didnt really like them or their country. The horrendous "Obama legacy" has yet to be fully plumbed. Nonetheless, we gotta factor in the Clintons. Al Gore claimed he would have won over GWB ....but Clinton getting lewinsikied in the oval office soured many voters.
Now Obama's got the buck-raking Clintons on his back....compounded by the fact that he installed Hillary at State. Obama puts on a convincing act. He "knows nothing." Obama didn't even know about this (snix).
Circa 2010--Ex-Pres Clinton in Moscow having a laugh w/ Putin.
as strategic US uranium deposits were sold off to Russia for Big Bucks.
With all the top-level intel available to him, can Americans actually believe:
<><>Obama was oblivious to the Clintons jerking around US foreign policy?
<><> Obama knew nothing of Hillary and Sid Blumenthal's emails WRT Iran (the man Obama banned from US govt employment)?
<><> Obama knew nothing about the Clinton Foundation/slush fund buck-raking activities?
<><> Obama never noticed Bill Clinton trotting around the globe?
<><> Obama never noticed the Clinton "charity" used to worm his way into the confidences of foreign leaders.... but only those leaders w/ untapped reserves of gold, uranium, oil, and other valuable commodities?
<><> Obama never knew Hillary's brother got a gold-mining permit in Haiti?
================================================
Obama hand-picked Hillary to run State, and they had a deal. Hillary and her husband capitalized on buck-raking opportunities......from Hillary's actions OR inaction. Secy Hillary never e-v-e-r uttered a discouraging word e-v-e-r......as the Clinton Foundation sucked up hundred of millions of foreign dollars from shady characters.
The avaricious Clintons devised hundreds of obscure programs to collect billions.....bragging about do-goodism, how the money was supposedly dispersed to "assist" endless charitable projects....as they raked in multi-million dollar honoraria, foundation donations. consultancies, lucrative insider business deals.
Now Obama's going after The Clintons. L/E observers say when the crooks are nailed it's b/c the protection payoffs weren't large enough. Obama's been reading all the sordid stories of the Clinton's hauling in billions selling off state secrets. He got short-changed.
WTF? The GOP will emerge stronger from this campaign, I believe. Hopefully Boehner will be gone as SOTH and McConnell will be gone as Senate Majority leader too. Or President Cruz can simply tell Marble-Mouth and Perma-Tan to take a hike.
Why would Cruz or Carson want to run with a Democrat on their ticket?
Obama’s goal was, and his legacy is, an old weak directionless U.S.A.
-— Obama’s goal was, and his legacy is, an old weak directionless U.S.A. -—
We all knew what “fundamental transformation” meant, but it was too difficult to overcome the media propaganda in getting our message out.
“I hope he fails.” —Rush
Not to quibble, but isn’t Boehner more orangish than tan?
The GOP is not in any better shape.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.