Mamdani won the Dem primary 3 months ago. He has been the ONLY Dem in the race for many weeks now.

I realize Obama wants to be scrupulous about not inserting himself into a live race, but this has not been a live race for months.

Having said that, I am glad Obama called, as long as this doesn't mean he is going to try to cajole Mamdani into moving away from his populist style. I would like to think this means that Obama now realizes that it was a huge mistake to try to meet fascists halfway, just as it sounded last year like Michelle realized the futility of "When they go low, we go high".

I hope this means that Obama realizes the energy in the Dem party is not with the appeasers, it is with those who proudly and firmly fight for progressive values. I hope this means that Obama is willing to start working behind the scenes to fundamentally remake the Democratic party and build it around the energy of people who are out there loud and proud, such as Mamdani, Plattner, AOC, Bernie, Jasmine, Liz Warren, Pritzker, Newsom and others who can easily join that team. And let's hope that means forming a strong alliance with the No Kings organizers, the David Hoggs of the world and the like.

This is a moment. It is an inflection point. Dem soft politics as usual will no longer work. We must unify and amplify the progressive energy that is already out there. We must make 2026 a wave election, and follow that in 2029 with the most progressive, action-oriented Congress and President in 50 years.

That's what I hope Obama is thinking. Considering Obama's nature has always been on the conciliatory side, I hope he is listening more than he is telling. We need Omana and the Clintons, and all the party seniors to help us remake what has become a tired, old, struggling party completely out of power. We can do this. The people are begging for energetic, progressive action-oriented leadership that is not afraid to take the fascists head on.

Because as a black man, he HAD to be. Much of what is going on right now is the horrible backlash to his election, and is being directed by the Grand Wizard white supremacist at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

"the angry Black man"!
😑

I understand the argument that he was afraid of being pegged "angry black man".

And I understand that this was an important moment in American history. I was 100% with that and voted for him twice. It seemed like progress. It seemed like the right thing to do.

With the benefit of hindsight, we now know that this reawakened the worst of this country's racist foundations that had been mostly dormant since the Civil War, or at least since the height of the KKK days. And that is why we are where we are today. There really is no denying that.

The question is, was it worth it? If we are indeed entering America's final act where the Obama term, such as it was, gave rise to Tea Party, birtherism, open racism, political violence and ultimately, Trump's destruction of our Constitutional government, was that worth it? If in 2008, we had any way of knowing that would be the ultimate result of electing Obama, would we still choose to do that?

I don't know. I think that is a very difficult question, and the fact is that while we might have expected a backlash, nobody was predicting it would lead to a fully fascist state just 13 years later. I just think we should be honest -- that IS what happened. We can't change it even if we wanted to, but we can pull together our best points of energy and stand up to the fascists where they are today. I hope Obama understands that he is a very important part of how we got here. I hope he feels some responsibility and will finally get off the sidelines and try to help pull together the factions needed to vigorously fight this regime.

The abject and abhorrent racism in this country is NOT Obama's problem. It's the problem of the majority group in this country who ARE the ones who need to "get off the sidelines" and CALL IT OUT.

Whenever some do, in comes the "but that's identity politics" and "that's just a distraction" crowd spewing more of that racist RW nonsense.

It is human nature and it will not be "solved" in our lifetimes but you can't keep demanding that the "victims" of it go out in front and take the hits while everyone else watches and holds the pawn's coat.

But that is no excuse for him taking a laissez-faire attitude. We are losing our country, and Obama still has enormous clout on our political stage. It is unforgivable for him to stand by doing nothing, using the excuse that our traditions and norms require ex-Presidents to stay out of the political arena. Trump is sending armies into all 50 states. He is kidnapping people and killing people indiscriminately, and threatening to impose martial law to leave himself in power as long as he lives.

If this is not enough for Obama to get off the sidelines, we are really and truly screwed.

Now, I hope that outreach to Mamdani was the beginning of an effort to pull together the points of maximum energy on the progressive side, then I applaud this without reservation. My fear is that, instead, what Obama refers to as a "sounding board" is actually advice to Mamdani to stop talking about bold ideas and just lay low, and all this bad stuff will just pass.

That is basically, how Obama operated his 8 years. And we can hold him accountable for that. Sure, there was no drama. But there were the foundations of the fascism we are suffering today. "No drama Obama" is not what we need today and I hope that isn't what he is preaching to Mamdani.

He has NEVER had a "laissez-faire attitude". Like every other POC in this country including myself, he has to navigate two worlds or he will be destroyed while the majority cowers in the background.

W. E. B. Dubois -



and Franz Fanon -



described the problem.

This phenomena has been written about for over a century.

You don't demand that the victim carries all the weight of fighting the victimizers while the kin of the victimizer sits back and lectures the victim for "not doing enough".

Last edited Sun Nov 2, 2025, 11:11 AM - Edit history (1)

I am not denying that. It is real, of course. That really is not what I am talking about.

I am talking about, what seems to me, as massive denialism. What I mean by that is that Obama has always been a picture of optimism -- that was a big part of his secret sauce. And he moved the country in a major way, or so we thought. We thought we were finally moving beyond the centuries of enduring racism that has been the foundation of this nation. His focus on the better angels was uplifting to millions of Americans.

Here is the problem. In fact, it was uplifting to a big part of the nation. But for another terribly large segment of the population, it brought out the worst demons. Nobody is blaming Obama for that. The enduring racism is there BECAUSE the country never dealt with it. The Civil War never ended, and today it seems to be back upon us in full force. That is not Obama's fault. It is America's big flaw. And I am certainly not saying Obama had many great options in 2009-2016 to have changed that. That is not what I am saying.

What I am saying is that his Presidency unleashed the beast (again, not Obama's fault -- the beast was and still is there). But if leaders across the board would have stepped up to that, as John McCain did on several occasions, maybe we could have dealt with the beast.

But other than McCain, there were no GOP leaders to step in an lift us up from our history of racism. I hope we both agree with all of this so far. The problem is what happened next, and that is what I am talking about today.

What happened next is that Trump, a life-long racist of the first order, saw this situation developing, and he saw an opportunity to step into the political space and make his "biggest deal ever". Trump rode that racist beast to power, but the two things that mean more to Trump than racism are money and adoration. In the span of 15 years, Trump has turned "birtherism" into a full-fledged fascist state where he can suck billions of dollars out of our economy, commit unlimited crimes with no punishment, and declare laws through executive order. And the fact that this also fans the flames of centuries-old racism, well that is a bonus for Trump.

When I watch Obama's recent speeches, I see the same Obama we saw in 2018. Mostly, he talks like none of this happened, and if we just win some elections here and there, everything will be fine. He is stumping for candidates, and I guess that is a good thing, but his message is anything but hair on fire. It is as if he doesn't really believe anything is wrong with what is happening to our country today.

And that is why I get very concerned when we hear he is trying to be counselor to Mamdani. I'm pretty sure Obama is trying to tell Mamdani, "Hey pal, ix-nay on the ocialism-say." From where I sit, it looks like Obama is trying to tamp down the voices that are challenging us to stand up to the threats we face today. Obama is not the only one, of course. We face a major fight between the Democratic Party establishment and the younger voices who are saying "No, this is not OK. We can no longer just go along to get along."

I hope I am reading Obama wrong, but I don't think so.

You ARE talking about it because it means that person has had an entirely different life experience and it came with a societal set of expectations that have maliciously "defined" them, boxing them into an existence where their perspectives are considered irrelevant, and are dismissed out of hand.



It was "dealt with - through "Reconstruction".



Read up on "Reconstruction", post-Civil War and the aftermath, "Jim Crow". We are going through a repeat of history.



But your original assertion was this -



And until people understand that Obama will never be considered "equal" to a Gavin Newsom or J.B. Pritzker, then the conversation will go nowhere. Obama was elected by a broad coalition of people, across the political spectrum (including by "moderate"/"liberal" GOPers), who were tired of Shrub (and his father's) wars and the existing economic calamity, the worst since the Great Depression.

Right now, PA has a "populist Liberal" Senator, who unfortunately after going through apparently mind-altering psychological therapy, has transformed into "something", but had originally hit all the "populist" notes when campaigning. He is a textbook case of the difficulty in maintaining "liberal populism" in an environment of "isms" that have been entrenched in this society.



The final piece of the current SCOTUS 6 that sealed what is going on, happened during the last year of the 2nd term of Obama, when no one "stepped up" when Turtle refused to schedule a confirmation hearing for Obama's SCOTUS pick after Scalia exited the world.



I disagree. I suppose you missed the 2024 campaign season.



Let me give you some examples of what people need to keep in mind and you need to reflect on this -

What happened to Katie Porter?
What happened to Cori Bush?
What happened to Jamaal Bowman?
What happened to Chesa Boudin (San Francisco's recalled D.A.)?
What happened to Pamela Price (Alameda County, CA's recalled D.A.)?
What happened to George Gascón (L.A.'s D.A. who lost reelection in 2024)?

4 of the 6 above progressives were in the state that boasts of being "the most progressive" in the nation.

A smart politician carries out assessments of the landscape and makes adjustments, notably taking into account past history.

It doesn't mean rejection of the messenger's intent, but it means "reading the room" and being able to adapt that to a diverse population.

When you have someone going around calling people concerned with being wiped out of history for their contributions to this country's history, many descending from people who were here at or before this nation's founding, and declaring that "engaging in identity politics", then guess what?? You lose that audience.

We have a progressive D.A. here in Philly running for his 3rd term. He had been skewered and lampooned and bashed as he tried to clean up the mess of a "Democratic" D.A. from years past who became known as the "hanging judge", and he did it. He is expected to pretty much cruise to reelection, running against a disgruntled former Democratic judge who lost the primary to him and is now running as a Republican against him.

Larry Krasner "read the room" during his first 2 terms and made adjustments.

This whole discourse shows that there remains the lack of understanding and the simple candor of the hardcore Texan former President - Lyndon Baines Johnson - who "put it where the goats can get it) -



The SCOTUS 6 is on the precipice of wiping out everything that LBJ did - both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965.

"Millionaires and billionaires" and the "Robber Barons" of old, have ALWAYS been around, literally for thousands of years. What is left of the Empires around the globe are a testament to this. They are never going away. And some goal of eliminating them will be a fool's errand. So there needs to be a more practical strategy to maximize the benefits of the "rest of the population".

I don't think we disagree too much here. And I know there are big limits on any POC -- it is easy for me to say Obama should be doing more.

I think our main difference really comes down to this one sentence:

What you have described is the sport of politics in normal times. Yes, politicians in normal times might need to be clever and cagey.

These are not normal times and the room you are reading seems to be different from the room I am reading. I see a 5-alarm fire that has already burned down half the building. I do not see any room for business as usual, and that is the vibe I am getting from Obama. That seems disastrous to me, and that has nothing to do with race, life experience or anything else. The destruction is right there in front of us. If we live is an isolated gated community, maybe we can choose to ignore it. I don't think moderation is what we need at this moment.

Anyway, I really do appreciate the education you have passed along to me and I will think on these things.

Some might not use those negative characterizations but might instead use "savvy" or "strategic" or "noncommittal".



You are narrowly viewing the room from the perspective of someone who is basically "a political junkie" who posts on a political discussion forum on the internet. Only a tiny tiny fraction of the population is like that, so they are NOT in the "same room" as you are. In fact, most are not even in the same building or in a building at all.

I.e., they are not going to get into the "macro" environment of this society and instead prefer to stay in a "micro" environment that is narrowed to whether whatever is going on in this country is impacting THEM directly. If it's not, then they are not going to actively seek out "problems" and dwell on whatever else is going on.

I see worse than a "5-alarm fire" and generationally, I descend from those who lived through 10-alarm fires and have passed those experiences down to me. So you can't dismiss the experiences of others and how they perceive the "current", as some have developed much better survival skills when confronted with what is going on, and consider any lecturing about what someone else is supposed to "see", as "elitist".



Again - each person is different but there are some who insist that everyone "is the same".

Obama grew up in 2 different majority-Asian societies as a child - Hawai'i and Indonesia. His background became a meld of 3 different "races" and his entire demeanor, which is often falsely mischaracterized, is based on that. There are definitely cultural aspects to how he approaches things, but there are many out there who not only refuse to "see" that, but refuse to accept that.

I expect, like the MLK Jr. quote in my sig, it comes down to "sincere ignorance". People truly "don't know". It's not necessarily their fault but it becomes a "fault" when trying to argue strategy.



As a discussion board, DU offers the ability to exchange ideas and perspectives and it is always good to have the discussions.

The modern day so-called progressive left. “Identity politics” was always a racist dog whistle.

Appalling.

I guess the “thanks Obama” meme wasn’t really just poking fun at those on the far right.

that his star shone so bright, that it distracted many Democrats from honestly assessing the state of the rest of the party - and the party can't claim any credit for "developing" Obama either - basically, the party just lucked out that a once in 50+ years superstar like Obama fell into their laps out of nowhere.

or maybe just the ones whom Trump isn't trying to starve right now---
the maggots who aren't on SNAP....

and probably some of those, too, who only have one brain cell remaining