Obama blamed Hillary for her loss
The new edition of 'Obama: The Call Of History' by New York Times chief White House correspondent Peter Baker lays bare Obama's fury over the election results.
Barack Obama admitted 'this stings' after the 2016 election result and spent the night watching the movie Dr Strange to try and distract himself, a new book claims.
The former president went from being confident that Hillary Clinton would beat Donald Trump to seeing it as a 'personal insult' that she lost.
Obama could not believe the American people had 'turned on him' for a man he had written off as a 'cartoon'.
As the dust settled Obama told his family that 'this hurts' and blamed Clinton who 'brought many of her troubles on herself' and ran a 'scripted, soulless campaign'.
As Obama saw it he 'almost got out' of the White House unscathed just like the mob boss nearly survived without being whacked. Obama arrogantly thought there was 'no way Americans would turn on him' even though Clinton was far from perfect.
Obama struggled with what the American people had done and thought to himself that they 'simply could not have decided to replace him with a buffoonish showman whose calling cards had been repeated bankruptcies, serial marriages and racist dog whistles'.
At 1am Obama sent a message to Clinton saying she should concede quickly which she did.
In a phone call to Obama Clinton said: 'I'm sorry for letting you down'.
....
In a stinging passage Baker writes: 'To Obama and his team, however, the real blame lay squarely with Clinton.'She was the one who could not translate his strong record and healthy economy into a winning message.
....
'Never mind that Trump essentially ran the same playbook against Clinton that Obama did eight years earlier, portraying her as a corrupt exemplar of the status quo.'She brought many of her troubles on herself. No one forced her to underestimate the danger in the Midwest states of Wisconsin and Michigan.
'No one forced her to set up a private email server that would come back to haunt her.
'No one forced her to take hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and other pillars of Wall Street for speeches.
....
What legacy was Hillary supposed to protect?
And much, much more....
This could be snark considering the source, but the fact remains that if Obama had been a decent president for the lower classes and hadn't been the second coming of Bush in regards to the destruction of the Middle East there is a good chance that Hillary would be president instead of Trump.
Comments
Geezuz
Both of them are self-centered losers.
Empty Suit
has a 'sad' about Empty Pant Suit.
Oh, the irony.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Splursh!!!!!
The sound of my beer hitting my iPad. Hey..little warning next time.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
"Empty pant suit" made my day. n/t
-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962
Here's the pantsuit she wore at one of her events
Here's more information on how much tickets have fallen since they started their tour.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Poor judgment on her part is the only reason for Hillary
to look as bad as as she consistently does.
As garments go, that one in that photo is not bad. It just doesn't look good on her. Among other things, she looks as though her neck is AWOL; as loose as the top is, I can still see the outline of her stomach; and a horizontal stripe around her hips is not the best idea, despite the slightly darker color. It is s a judgment issue, albeit on a superficial level.
Hillary has more than enough money to buy any clothes she wishes and to hire the best "stylists." In fact, I think I recall some noise from the 2015-16 primary about the amount of money she spend on one outfit in particular--or maybe it was just a jacket. I don't recall the details. ETA: Found it: Almost $12,500 on a jacket worn to give a speech about economic inequality! See? What did I tell you? Bad judgment.)
In any event, the only time I thought she looked very well put together was the time she wore some navy and ivory deal to debate Sanders. I've also posted on Sanders' look (as did many political commentators who did not dare to or care to post on Hillary's, his hair having been a particular fetish of theirs, even after he got what I called his "campaign haircut.")
Nonetheless, some Hillary fans "schooled" me on another board. According to them, it's perfectly fine to comment on men's age and appearance--as Hillary's message board fans* often did with Sanders (but no other male politicians)--but not women's. Because "It's different for a woman."
Then again, many things they posted set back the cause of equal rights for women, IMO. I guess "equal" is demanding Victorian delicacy for females while savagely attacking their male opponents, while yelping "sexism" at every turn.
*I am referring to posters with whom I had posted for years, not Brock's million dollar babies.
Chivalry = Chauvinism
Baby-Boomer feminists have discovered that getting out of the kitchen requires first stepping down off the pedestal...and some of them are discovering maybe they preferred the pedestal.
You cannot end sexism while preserving gender identity. They are one and the same. For this reason, I claim "feminism" is an obsolete concept, and its current standard bearers are NOT part of a continuing movement, but a reaction AGAINST that movement.
It's just like I tried saying on DailyKos: The problem now is collective identity. ALL collective identity. Gender's kind of the worst because it's the biggest. It's basically personality cancer. We need to evolve beyond it.
In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is declared mentally ill for describing colors.
Yes Virginia, there is a Global Banking Conspiracy!
Obama and Hillary
the empty suit and the oven mitt.
Get the Look! at K-Mart.
From one of her fund raisers.
Potholder Hillary!
Never gets old.
(The picture, I mean).
Hillary was just being
practical. She needed them big pockets to stuff the big fat checks into.
During the Obama administration, I posted (elsewhere) again
and again that not everything was about Obama. I did so because any time I posted anything negative about politics in general, politicians in general or Democrats in general, a swarm of Dembots and/or Obamabots began explaining why Obama had done something or other. In that respect, this article illustrates the aphorism that the fish stinks from the head down.
Perhaps Obama's fans thought that everything was about Obama because Obama thinks everything is about Obama, including a U.S. Presidential election in which he was neither running nor eligible to run. It was not about the nation or Americans; it was about Obama and his legacy. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.
As for the insults to Hillary, Obama asked for whatever he got. It's not as though they first met in 2015. He had plenty of clues about how scripted and lacking soul she always has been, not to mention her ability to arouse negative emotions in many people, including him. ("You're likeable enough, Hillary,")
IIRC, she had campaigned for him when he ran for the Senate. They "served" in the Senate together. They ran against each other in 2008, when I first encountered the term "racially-tinged." And, I encountered it again and again during those months. And, if that story about being under gunfire in airport when children greeted her with flowers wasn't a clue, no wonder he wasn't the great President Trump and media make him appear to have been.
I will always believe that Obama, Biden and other powerful Democrats made a Faustian bargain with the Clintons in 2008--and it was not, as we were told after an allegedly top secret meeting between Obama and Hillary at Difi's home--to help Hillary raise money to pay off her campaign debts. (Who would have leaked that "top secret?" Obama? His poodle, Difi? Hillary? None of the them. The story was planted with some establishment media collaborator to forestall questions about their actual deal.)
IMO, their deal was for all Democrats in charge to do everything in their power to see that she because the Democratic Presidential nominee in 2016, in return for the Clintons' full-throated support for Obama in 2008, the office of Secretary of State for Hillary* and no challenge to Obama's re-election from Hillary in 2012. I know of no other way to explain what we witnessed after Hillary FINALLY dropped out of the 2008 primary.
And Biden had to be in on it or 2016 would have been his turn, she already having had--and blown--her turn in 2008. Which is why I never bought that he refrained in 2016 because he was needed to help his family grieve the loss of his son. What is to say that getting involved in Joe's Presidential campaign would not have helped his family move on more than his stepping aside?
Obama sent ONE email to his donors asking them to contribute to Hillary's campaign and held ONE fundraiser. I know that because I was enough of a donor to Obama from Thanksgiving 2007 to election day 2008 to to get not one, but two, free Obama-Biden T-shirts that I gave away afterward and make the Christmas Card list--an actuaI card, not a Xeroxed greeting as I got after the first two or three years because I'd stopped donating.
Seriously, is that really a deal the cut throat Clintons would ever have cut? Moreover, the very last things the hundred millionaire Clintons were worrying about during the 2008 primary were money to pay campaign debts and their ability to raise funds without help from Obama. That they'd done for decades. Probably the first ten minutes of a speech at Goldman Sachs would have taken care of her campaign debts and then some.
Speaking of soul-less and scripted, though, that's how Obama's remarks about Hillary are striking me. Let's face it> Neither of them is either spontaneous or a bleeding heart. Obama is just better at delivering the script and/or has better writers.
*According to Biden's wife on an Oprah show, Obama had called Biden, getting through to Biden while Biden was in the dentist's chair, to ask Biden if Biden wanted VP or SoS; and Biden's wife had voted for VP because SoS would have required Biden to be away from home often. I'd even bet that Biden had to take that call while in the dentist's chair because Hillary's team and Obama's team were in the midst of negotiating when Obama made the call. (If you recall, during the primary debates, Biden had said he would not accept VP, but reacted favorably when the moderator asked Biden if he'd accept Secretary of State.
+ 2 for "the fish stinks from the head down"
It was Dukakis (another significant loser) that said "the fish rots from the head down " Much more emotive imo.
Cudda been a +1 but for a word!
Heh!
Prof: Nancy! I’m going to Greece!
Nancy: And swim the English Channel?
Prof: No. No. To ancient Greece where burning Sapho stood beside the wine dark sea. Wa de do da! Nancy, I’ve invented a time machine!
Firesign Theater
Stop the War!
Well, Obama did liken himself
to Michael Corleone. I guess he wanted to associate with the youngish, handsome and kinda cool guy who's the boss.
But really, Michael Corleone*, a Mafia Don? Isn't that the Donald Trump role?
Best remark about Trump of the 2016 campaign came early from Michael Bloomberg , who pithily noted that "New Yorkers know a conman when they see one."
Short, brutal and sweet. And spot on. Why didn't the Dems and Hillary use it more often? Or at all after MB uttered it? Especially when Donald was calling Hillary a crook.
* Saw the first 2 Godfather movies, not the 3d. Am I missing something with the Obama-MC association?
Hillary IS a crook.
Clinton had to try awfully hard to lose.
Of course, when you're a collaborationist you win either way -- if you lose you get what you want, victory by the forces whom you've been supporting all along, and if you win then you are afforded even more opportunities to give the store away to your so-called "opponents." Of course Obama can't discuss the real reason why Clinton lost -- she's a rich snob who spent way too much time fundraising from other rich people and who wears it on her sleeve that she doesn't care about folks with portfolios of less than six figures. That and she was willing to say anything to please anyone in the most blatant and worthless displays of pandering. The margin was provided by people in the upper Midwest who voted twice for Obama and left the ballot blank in 2016. Look, if you're losing to a reality TV star and failed businessman with no political credentials...
“When there's no fight over programme, the election becomes a casting exercise. Trump's win is the unstoppable consequence of this situation.” - Jean-Luc Melanchon
I think Obama's take was the right one.
He took it personally.
In US Presidential politics, when the candidate is from the incumbent Party, which Hillary was, as a Democrat — then unless there was a terrible scandal involved, that candidate is running on MORE OF THE SAME.
Hillary's content-free campaign was the result. Obama and the major donors expected her tout Obama's record and achievements and successes. They wanted her to extend his vision far into the future and make "more of the same" a good thing. Hillary didn't want to be an Obama cheerleader. She disagreed with most of his policies. She wanted to break and run for Empire back in 2008; she was born to carry the Lesser Bush's ball into the end zone. It was Hillary's destiny to climb the throne above all other nations, and rule the world.
Obama's policies had set everything back, as far as she was concerned. Blacks and minorities did poorly under Obama. The Neocons were murdering freely abroad but they weren't getting any geopolitical bang for their bucks, The MIC was still plundering the US treasury but there was no forward momentum in the Iran war and new wars in Asia. The only Empire-pushing Obama was doing was economic conquest with the TPP (and the TTIF, and she, herself, surrendered the TPP toward the end thinking it would deliver some worker/union votes.
She had only platitudes and fumes and identity politics. But that was because she refused to carry Obama's legacy into the future.
"content-free campaign"
volunteers who went door to door for Obama in 2008 were specifically told not to discuss issues but, rather, to "tell their own story", whatever that means.
The Obama campaign was just as content-free in the end. His speeches were nice but it was official policy not to get locked into doing anything. Hillary in 2016 was just repeating that, except without the inspirational gobbledy-gook from live appearances. Oh, yeah, that's right....she didn't really do any rallies, just house visits for big money.
Sorta like the
passive, do-nothing-except-play-golf Ike. Obama -- best moderate Republican in the WH since the 50s.
And probably a better golfer than Ike.
Ike did send troops to Little Rock, Ark. to enforce integration
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rock_Nine
Obama? Let torturers and crooked bankers get off scot-free. Put the jackboot down on Occupy Wall Street. Allowed Hillary to destroy Libya and then cackle about it.
Obama's legacy --
was to give up the Congress, the Senate, the Supreme Court, and the statehouses to the Republicans. Clinton gave up the White House for him.
You do know this, right?
“When there's no fight over programme, the election becomes a casting exercise. Trump's win is the unstoppable consequence of this situation.” - Jean-Luc Melanchon
Technically, that is true
Gave it up to the Republicans.
But Party politics is such a low level game when it comes to what this nation does in the world, and the American people do not understand that the US death and destruction in the world is the sole reason why they are in a deadly dive to the bottom.
The Elections are a trashy distraction, and I really have no business commenting about them. I'll stop. It's futile. Let me leave you with this:
Canada (red squares) has one of the longer campaign seasons in the world. Incomparison, there is no word for the time-wasters diversion that the US (gray squares) is involved in. It's a brain-washing, brain-emptying, media-protifeering disgrace.
Plus, the Republicans are going to win a second term, according to the predictive technologies I use, like the 13 Keys. That outcome can be changed, but only by real-world events. The time-wasters campaign changes nothing. People are voting for miracles now.
I see Obama's tenure as President as a personal insult.
And what really "stings" is his 8 years of broken promises.
The fact that he made Hillary SOS as compensation for her loss rather than find a candidate who truly had the background and intelligence to BE a good SOS really points to a lack of political smarts on his part So NOW he is surprised by how she ran her campaign??
He's nothing more than another player and unfortunately he is still playing...
Just ask the people of Chicago about his narcissistic tone deafness about the environmental and social effects of his Presidential Center.
Maybe he didn't recognize the destruction Hillary was going to bring because they are so much alike.
The parting gift given to us by the Obama/Biden/Clinton years was Hillary Clinton. The Russians had nothing to do with it.
Oh and one more thing... the fact that Michelle Obama publicly stated that George W. Bush is "a lovely man" says all we need to know about the Obamas.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
And now ByeDone is saying that our problems aren't
the republicans. Nope. Everything that is happening is because of Trump and not Paul Ryan who gave his buddies their huge tax cuts. Or McConnell who is stacking the courts with right wing judges after denying Obama's picks for 8 years and refused to give Garland a vote. ByeDone is not going to stand up to the republicans if he gets in. More bipartisanship when the country needs someone else.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Also hey JtC
Are you not frontpaging this?
“When there's no fight over programme, the election becomes a casting exercise. Trump's win is the unstoppable consequence of this situation.” - Jean-Luc Melanchon
So
Filed under "more and better democrats" what was the part about dissing fellow democrats? If you love HER, and you call out Obama for running HER down, is that racism? Anybody get Bidens thoughts? Gets better and better all the time.
P.S. when I read it first I thought he was watching "Dr. Strangelove" (seemed appropriate) not a Disney flick.
Speaking of stinging...
If that call actually happened, can you imagine how much bile HER had to choke down during it? I wanna know more about this frankly. The Clintons don’t do humble or apologies, especially not to people they obviously consider their lessors.
Edit for typo.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
@Dr. John Carpenter I was going to make a
I was going to make a post about this but you beat me to it:
Lines like that seem scripted, like something you would see an athlete say to a coach or in a movie.
No, that line is something that the team came up with. She was probably pissed as hell and went on a tirade.
Yeah no way HER genuflected to Obama
especially telling the man who took what was rightfully HERs (gag) in 2008 “sorry I let you down” after flushing 2016 down the crapper. No way!
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Clearly Obama is part of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (TM)
It's things like this that make me wonder why anybody would support such an obviously sexist and homophobic candidate.
/snark
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
What legacy?
Really, for most people he did nothing. Now, if I was an investment banker, I might have appreciated all he did ...
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott
A legacy of
cool.
That's the point
This is why Trump is Obama's legacy. He couldn't bother to do anything for us little people and that's why people rejected Herheinous and voted Trump or stayed home.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Remember when Hillary got $250k for a speech?
How the mighty have fallen.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Seems inconsistent with the smooth talker bullshiter.
Of course my memory is limited, but the only time the Obama administration attacked anybody was on the "professional left". Recently punching left over purity if I got it right. He has over time attached the left wing of the party.
And now this attack on Hillary who certainly is not the professional left. It seems more like Hillary attacking Bernie in her book on the election--somethign raw and emotional.
Obama's attack seems one of two things. It is deeply personal. And not something about legacy bullshit. Obama decide for some payback. But something in the past that just Hillary did to Obama which he never forgave.
One thing about Obama's attack is that it does not blame the Russians.
Or this is just the surface of some war in the democratic power elites on the control of the democratic party. It seemed to me that the party establishment was divided between Hillary and Obama supporters.
Payback for the things she said about during the primary
After it was clear that she was going to lose to Obama she took her gloves off and started saying some very horrible things about him. She got down right nasty in her attack ads. Maybe this is why he is saying that now? The first edition of the book didn't have this in it according to the article.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.