Home Topics in Depth Economics Democrats can’t win until they recognize how bad Obama’s financial policies were

  • N2Doc (4769 posts)
    Profile photo of N2Doc Donor

    Democrats can’t win until they recognize how bad Obama’s financial policies were

    He had opportunities to help the working class, and he passed them up.
    By Matt Stoller


    During his final news conference of 2016, in mid-December, President Obama criticized Democratic efforts during the election. “Where Democrats are characterized as coastal, liberal, latte-sipping, you know, politically correct, out-of-touch folks,” Obama said, “we have to be in those communities.” In fact, he went on, being in those communities — “going to fish-fries and sitting in VFW halls and talking to farmers” — is how, by his account, he became president. It’s true that Obama is skilled at projecting a populist image; he beat Hillary Clinton in Iowa in 2008, for instance, partly by attacking agriculture monopolies .

    But Obama can’t place the blame for Clinton’s poor performance purely on her campaign. On the contrary, the past eight years of policymaking have damaged Democrats at all levels. Recovering Democratic strength will require the party’s leaders to come to terms with what it has become — and the role Obama played in bringing it to this point.

    Two key elements characterized the kind of domestic political economy the administration pursued: The first was the foreclosure crisis and the subsequent bank bailouts. The resulting policy framework of Tim Geithner’s Treasury Department was, in effect, a wholesale attack on the American home (the main store of middle-class wealth) in favor of concentrated financial power. The second was the administration’s pro-monopoly policies, which crushed the rural areas that in 2016 lost voter turnout and swung to Donald Trump.




    DJ13, OzoneTom, Hawkowl and 7 otherskath, Fasttense, Populist Prole, PADemD, tk2kewl, mmonk, Scuba like this
    "But nothing ever changes unless there's some pain" - Tears For Fears "Goodnight Song"

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

▼ Hide Reply Index
8 replies
  • djean111 (5256 posts)
    Profile photo of djean111 Donor

    1. Democrats won't win, because those financial policies benefited the .1%.

    I don’t think they really understand the concept of “bad for the working class” as anything to worry about.  After all, who else is the working class gonna vote for, amiright?  They are deep in blame-it-on-Russia-and-Bernie-and-gerrymandering-and-vote-suppression denial right now, and I do not believe they will ever really recognize what is happening.  That’s why I am out, and that’s why I do not think they can be changed.  They will just keep looking for better MARKETING solutions, and welcome the money and efforts and votes of those who think they will change.  With a sneer.

    Any party who cared about the working class would never have championed the TPP.

    • *Obligatory disclaimer - when I say "Democratic Party" I mean the DNC - the Clintons and the un-elected people and the consultants and the lobbyists and the corporations who actually run things.  The people who work and vote and are registered as "D" are no more the actual party than Trekkies are Star Trek.   Extra credit - the Democratic Party gets to actually fuck up your life. When you vote for it.
    You think the only reason that people won't vote for a warmongering Third Way fracking-enabling cluster bomb throwing H-1B increasing lying pandering corporate and Wall Street shill who says she has no problem putting abortion rights on the table is because we are mad about Bernie?  Um, nope.
    • Populist Prole (754 posts)
      Profile photo of Populist Prole Donor

      3. Fantastic post; every word

      You also got the gist of the article well:

      “I don’t think they really understand the concept of “bad for the working class” as anything to worry about

      That’s exactly it. They do understand it. They want it to be bad for the working class. Ideologically, they’re thoroughly convinced that class of “deplorables” has no place in the aprty of well educated “beautiful people”.

      • FanBoy (7985 posts)
        Profile photo of FanBoy

        5. +100 Making it bad for workers makes it better for them.

        I think that’s been known for nearly two centuries.

        That’s capitalism — rah rah

  • GZeusH (2224 posts)
    Profile photo of GZeusH

    2. populist IMAGE

    Maybe a better word is “mirage”.   There was no populist substance to Obama at all.

    Policy:  The mistaken notion that bossy people have that they can influence other people's behavior through majority rule.
    • Hawkowl (1362 posts)
      Profile photo of Hawkowl Donor

      8. Populist Fraud

      Fraud, lie, sham. It was deliberate and malicious.

      "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” - Burke
  • FanBoy (7985 posts)
    Profile photo of FanBoy

    4. i wonder why the wapo (owner: baldy bezos) is spouting this now.

  • Fasttense (1605 posts)
    Profile photo of Fasttense Donor

    6. The article reads like an explanation of why capitalism fails

    It’s like over here in this corner you have the uber rich capitalists and in this corner you have the other uber rich capitalists and the voters in the middle run screaming from one populist sounding guy to another. All the while the capitalists born into wealth and organized crime are killing off the voters as they run around screaming.

    It ain’t Obama’s fault; it ain’t Trump’s fault. It’s how the system is designed.  You can’t have democracy in government if you have feudalism in the workplace.

  • westerebus (151 posts)
    Profile photo of westerebus Donor

    7. Goldman- Sacks policies would be correct.

    The resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the two political corporations that enact Golum’s wishes remain in control.

    To call out one person, just shifts the focus away from the organizers of the crimes to their paid henchmen.

    Current resident is no exception.