Keith Ellison blasts Obama for party losses

[Yank2133]

This is revisionist history.

Democrats didn't want anything to do with Obama in 2010 and 2014 and ran away from his record and didn't want him to campaign for them. Obama should take hits for keeping DWS, but D's need to own up to their own ineptitude down the ballot.

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

People are sick of Obama, who let those who crashed the world economy like former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin off the hook. And Cory Booker who said that Obama was too mean to Bain and Kamala Harris who let Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin off the hook are not the answer.

Obama left office with high approval ratings and favorability and would have won a third term fairly easily if he was eligible.

Seriously, some of you on the left need to realize that the general public does not give a sh**t about Wall-Street, Goldman Sachs, bankers etc. They never have and never will and you will go no where if you think it is some "winning" message.

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

People are sick of Obama, who let those who crashed the world economy like former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin off the hook. And Cory Booker who said that Obama was too mean to Bain and Kamala Harris who let Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin off the hook are not the answer.

Obama left office with high approval ratings and favorability and would have won a third term fairly easily if he was eligible.

Seriously, some of you on the left need to realize that the general public does not give a sh**t about Wall-Street, Goldman Sachs, bankers etc. They never have and never will and you will go no where if you think it is some "winning" message.

Being in the '50's isn't "high approval ratings", and most of that came from a receiving a break from coverage. He was blatantly in the 40's all the way from the Shutdown until the cycle began.

If he were going for Part III, he might very well have lost as well because of this, and by worse since the platform wouldn't be forced far enough left to satiate the base.

He was at 50% during the election of 2012, when the economy was in much worse shape and he doesn't have the baggage Clinton had.

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

People are sick of Obama, who let those who crashed the world economy like former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin off the hook. And Cory Booker who said that Obama was too mean to Bain and Kamala Harris who let Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin off the hook are not the answer.

Obama left office with high approval ratings and favorability and would have won a third term fairly easily if he was eligible.

Seriously, some of you on the left need to realize that the general public does not give a sh**t about Wall-Street, Goldman Sachs, bankers etc. They never have and never will and you will go no where if you think it is some "winning" message.

Pretty ridiculous post because Obama's ratings are at a historic mediocrity. http://www.gallup.com/poll/202742/obama-averages-job-approval-president.aspx

As a matter of fact he has the worst average approval ratings in the recent era. Freaking George Bush has better average approvals than him. Even Richard Nixon has, that is how horrible Obama's ratings are. Bill Clinton had much better ratings

You hold a fringe position & are totally out of touch. That is why Bernie Sanders is consistently the moved popular politician in USA !

It is called the rise of political polarization.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/01/12/presidential-job-approval-ratings-from-ike-to-obama/

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

People are sick of Obama, who let those who crashed the world economy like former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin off the hook. And Cory Booker who said that Obama was too mean to Bain and Kamala Harris who let Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin off the hook are not the answer.

Seriously, some of you on the left need to realize that the general public does not give a sh**t about Wall-Street, Goldman Sachs, bankers etc. They never have and never will and you will go no where if you think it is some "winning" message.

...you actually believe this?

It is the truth from anyone who actually lives outside the lefty bubble. Trump has been loading his administration with people who believe in policies that lead to the crash in 2008. And yet none of the people who voted for Trump (the people Bernie, Perez are trying to win over) give a sh**t.

It is an issue that young, white progressive men care about, but no one else does.

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

People are sick of Obama, who let those who crashed the world economy like former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin off the hook. And Cory Booker who said that Obama was too mean to Bain and Kamala Harris who let Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin off the hook are not the answer.

Obama left office with high approval ratings and favorability and would have won a third term fairly easily if he was eligible.

Seriously, some of you on the left need to realize that the general public does not give a sh**t about Wall-Street, Goldman Sachs, bankers etc. They never have and never will and you will go no where if you think it is some "winning" message.

Pretty ridiculous post because Obama's ratings are at a historic mediocrity. http://www.gallup.com/poll/202742/obama-averages-job-approval-president.aspx

As a matter of fact he has the worst average approval ratings in the recent era. Freaking George Bush has better average approvals than him. Even Richard Nixon has, that is how horrible Obama's ratings are. Bill Clinton had much better ratings

You hold a fringe position & are totally out of touch. That is why Bernie Sanders is consistently the moved popular politician in USA !

It is called the rise of political polarization.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/01/12/presidential-job-approval-ratings-from-ike-to-obama/

Why does George Bush with 26% approval, shunned by his party in 2008, with iraq War has better approvals than Barack Obama? Bush was even in a very divisive partisan era.

And for all the partisan hackery, Bernie Sanders has an approval rating of 57-61% nationwide. Despite a low support from Republicans, he has massive support among Independents powering him up.  Obama has mediocre approval ratings from independents & if you blame everything on polarization, you are being a partisan hack !

Bush had a 91% approval rating after 9/11, that is what boasted his numbers. Obama never reached that high, but he never bottomed out.  

And Obama left office with the 2nd highest approval rating for an outgoing president. (60%, 2nd only to Clinton in 2001). 55% thought Obama was good/great president according to Quinnipiac. His key legislative achievement (Obamacare) is more popular then ever.

So this whole notion that people were sick of Obama is just nonsense.

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

People are sick of Obama, who let those who crashed the world economy like former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin off the hook. And Cory Booker who said that Obama was too mean to Bain and Kamala Harris who let Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin off the hook are not the answer.

Seriously, some of you on the left need to realize that the general public does not give a sh**t about Wall-Street, Goldman Sachs, bankers etc. They never have and never will and you will go no where if you think it is some "winning" message.

...you actually believe this?

It is the truth from anyone who actually lives outside the lefty bubble. Trump has been loading his administration with people who believe in policies that lead to the crash in 2008. And yet none of the people who voted for Trump (the people Bernie, Perez are trying to win over) give a sh**t.

It is an issue that young, white progressive men care about, but no one else does.

Another garbage post slandering the most popular politician today. Bernie won the hispanic & Asian votes in most states including hawaii, the most diverse state.

And White progressive men? Bernie's approvals among Women is 58% (going above 60% in many polls), better than anyone else including Hillary. Not even Obama had this. Bernie Sanders destroyed Hillary among young women, White or hispanic or Asian American.

That kind of garbage posts trying to portray as "White men" association is pathetic & partisan hackery & being a David Brock Surrogate.

BTW Mr. David Brock, The repeal of the Glass Steagal was one of the fundamental reasons behind the 2008 crash as was letting a maniac like Alan Greenspan de-regulate the economy to the ground.
 Both were done under Bill Clinton & Democrats who have to take massive blame for the 2008 crash.

You obviously are very alike to Trump & his administration providing "Alternate facts" like "White Progressive Men" only care about Bernie's policies

And yet Bernie still lost minorities to Clinton in huge numbers. Anyway, I am not here to fight the primary again. The fact is no one care about Wall-Street, the banks etc. And to attribute that to the Democratic losses in 2010 and 2014 is disingenuous.

If the left think this is a way to win over Obama to Trump voters then they are stupid and deserve to be marginalize.

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

People are sick of Obama, who let those who crashed the world economy like former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin off the hook. And Cory Booker who said that Obama was too mean to Bain and Kamala Harris who let Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin off the hook are not the answer.

Obama left office with high approval ratings and favorability and would have won a third term fairly easily if he was eligible.

Seriously, some of you on the left need to realize that the general public does not give a sh**t about Wall-Street, Goldman Sachs, bankers etc. They never have and never will and you will go no where if you think it is some "winning" message.

Being in the '50's isn't "high approval ratings", and most of that came from a receiving a break from coverage. He was blatantly in the 40's all the way from the Shutdown until the cycle began.

If he were going for Part III, he might very well have lost as well because of this, and by worse since the platform wouldn't be forced far enough left to satiate the base.

He was at 50% during the election of 2012, when the economy was in much worse shape and he doesn't have the baggage Clinton had.

Yes, that was during re-election when Mitt Romney was even more out of touch and the GOP overplayed their hand with the Tea Party.

Also, he had knocking off Osama to ride on.

That doesn't change the 2 year below 50 slump he had right around the time of the bad Obamacare rollout all the way to the cycle.


And as for the last comment: So what does it really matter if he did come oyt with the highest since Bill if he couldn't transfer it anyway?

And you don't think his approval rating would have gone up against Trump?

The point is that it refutes Jfern's notion that people are sick of Obama, that isn't politically reality at the moment.

[Yank2133]

To be fair, given the economic meltdown in 2008-10, a lot of that was baked in and had nothing to do with party leadership. Look at what happened in 1874, 1894, 1930, 1958, 1974, and 1982. It didn't matter that Cleveland blamed the Panic of '93 on the Republicans passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, or that the Democrats rejected the Bourbons in 1896.

It had everything to do with Obama putting Goldman Sachs in charge of the nation's finances at a time when the public was screaming for the blood of the bankers (and most of us still are). Instead of punishing Wall Street greed, he rewarded it! It was a historic fumble at a moment when the American people were demanding actual change. Imagine if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had put Henry Ford in charge of the nation's economy. What a disaster.

This is bullsh**t lefty talk.

The issue in 2010 was the backlash to the ACA. In 2014, it was a combination of Obama fatigue (year six of his presidency) and issues like the "if you like your plan you can keep it", NSA leak, the ACA website problems, Syria etc.

People are sick of Obama, who let those who crashed the world economy like former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin off the hook. And Cory Booker who said that Obama was too mean to Bain and Kamala Harris who let Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin off the hook are not the answer.

Obama left office with high approval ratings and favorability and would have won a third term fairly easily if he was eligible.

Seriously, some of you on the left need to realize that the general public does not give a sh**t about Wall-Street, Goldman Sachs, bankers etc. They never have and never will and you will go no where if you think it is some "winning" message.

Pretty ridiculous post because Obama's ratings are at a historic mediocrity. http://www.gallup.com/poll/202742/obama-averages-job-approval-president.aspx

As a matter of fact he has the worst average approval ratings in the recent era. Freaking George Bush has better average approvals than him. Even Richard Nixon has, that is how horrible Obama's ratings are. Bill Clinton had much better ratings

You hold a fringe position & are totally out of touch. That is why Bernie Sanders is consistently the moved popular politician in USA !

It is called the rise of political polarization.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/01/12/presidential-job-approval-ratings-from-ike-to-obama/

Why does George Bush with 26% approval, shunned by his party in 2008, with iraq War has better approvals than Barack Obama? Bush was even in a very divisive partisan era.

And for all the partisan hackery, Bernie Sanders has an approval rating of 57-61% nationwide. Despite a low support from Republicans, he has massive support among Independents powering him up.  Obama has mediocre approval ratings from independents & if you blame everything on polarization, you are being a partisan hack !

Bush had a 91% approval rating after 9/11, that is what boasted his numbers. Obama never reached that high, but he never bottomed out.  

And Obama left office with the 2nd highest approval rating for an outgoing president. (60%, 2nd only to Clinton in 2001). 55% thought Obama was good/great president according to Quinnipiac. His key legislative achievement (Obamacare) is more popular then ever.

So this whole notion that people were sick of Obama is just nonsense.

What did he do in the last 1 year that his ratings bounced up? Obama had consistent mediocre ratings throughout his term. He only recovered because of Trump's nonsense that people thought he was so much better.

You can't judge a presidency by a rating at one point, beginning or ending - That is just insanely stupid. Ratings are judged by an average, even school children know that. And for all that 9/11, Bush also had Iraq, Great recession etc which made his ratings collapse to 26%, something Obama never had pulling his rating down.

And anyways you are a David Brock type of person, a Trump guy with "Alternative facts" who slanders & lies about white progressive men only supporting Bernie.

Obama's ratings among independents throughout his term were flat out mediocre.

So by your theory, Harry Truman was worst president then George H.W Bush.