70 points

“Barack Obama is the best speaker in the Democratic party and the second best speaker in his family.”

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Crowd sizes lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Both Obamas had fine speeches tonight, but Reverend Warnock was superlative.

permalink
report
reply
-11 points

Chaff post

permalink
report
reply
-17 points
Mother Jones - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for Mother Jones:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/08/michelle-obama-democratic-national-convention-speech/

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

permalink
report
reply
-30 points
*

The Obama’s were right on point by Obama standards. They delivered extremely well crafted rousing speeches, positively dripping with charisma in a way that almost papers over how shallow their sentiments are. The thing I dislike about the Obamas more than anything, is that they are determined to channel a tremendous amount of talent and good will toward preserving the entrenched power structure that is ultimately the main thing that’s rotting out this country. They are feel-good oligarchs.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

You don’t seem to know what an oligarch is, which kind of devalues your whole comment.

Also I think you are just straight up wrong about their motivations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

I went and looked up definitions of ‘oligarch’ to make sure I didn’t misspeak. Nearly everything I found lines up perfectly with the point I was expressing.

Your focus on motivations isn’t a useful way to evaluate figures like the Obamas. It doesn’t matter what’s in their hearts, only their actions. What difference do their beliefs make, if their actions are harmful?

Obama’s entire administration was filled to the brim with actions and inactions that had the effect of protecting and preserving entrenched power structures. Here’s several examples:

Obama chose to let the individuals and organizations directly responsible for the 2008 economic collapse to avoid criminal accountability. Obama massively increased the use of lethal unmanned drones and instituted a policy of retroactively classifying civilians killed by them as combatants because of those individuals proximity to the resulting explosions. Obama sacrificed the Supreme Court seat that would lead to Roe’s overturning by choosing to not challenge McConnell’s unprecedented months long stalling. Michelle Obama’s misguided “when they go low, we go high” sentiment perfectly characterized the ineffective, elitist political strategy that enabled trump to win in ‘16. I can go on and on with examples.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

What about them embodies an oligarch? What about them is insincere?

Do you have anything to support your assertions, or was this just a random ass rant to try and sound cool and like your know what you’re taking about? Because it doesn’t feel like you know what you’re taking about.

Nothing you’ve said has been accurate or made sense yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Made sense to me. “DO SOMETHING!”

Like what?

It gets the crowd fired up without providing any productive outlet for that energy.

Barak appealed to our shared humanity. As a trans woman, he asked me to understand the views of people that wish I was dead.

Maybe it’s good politics, but I don’t have to like it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

By oligarch, I am referring to a small, exclusive group of rulers that hoard power.

I have already said that their ‘sincerity’ is irrelevant to my point and a useless way to assess people like this.

To address the specific examples I raised:

Providing legal cover to white collar criminals protects the ruling class that Obama served as president.

Crafting the legal framework to indiscriminately kill civilians protects the enforcement mechanism that the ruling class needs to project power.

Failing to defend an open Supreme Court seat opened the door to removing rights to bodily autonomy and moved us closer to a theocratic autocracy.

Celebrating a strategy of rhetorical weakness against racists and fascist, made it easier for them to win the White House in 2016.

Do you have anything to support your assertions, or was this just some pedantic, contrarian troll posting?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

I’m sorry, I need to support my assertions?

Which assertions did I make?

I asked for your sources, and you just gave rhetoric back in response. I’ve asserted nothing, other than without you providing proof of assertions, you sound like a teenager trying to be edgy with a weak grasp of politics and world /American history.

Your claim to try and whataboutism me on asking for supporting assertions continues to support the narrative that you don’t really understand the terms and topics you’re throwing around. Your heart is in the right place I think, but you’re coming across in a way that’s damaging to your argument or point because of some simple mistakes and erroneous assumptions you’re making and continuing to defend (like Obama is an oligarch, which he absolutely is not, and if you ever lived or visited a country or met a real oligarch, you would understand that. This de-legitimizes much of your argument to many people.)

Of course Obama screwed up and made mistakes with things like the supreme court position. He, wrongly, assumed Republicans would play fair and the voters would hold them accountable if they didn’t.

He was brutally wrong. He addresses that issue, and others you’ve called out in his book and there are numerous witnesses and sources to back him up.

But do go ahead and try to demonize him, without acknowledging that pretty much every other president in modern history did much worse. That’s not to excuse the mistakes he did make, but much of what you’re claiming is just rhetoric.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

yep. I loved the obamas-- still do. I’d vote for M Obama in a heartbeat over Harris. But I wanted so much more out of them. There was No work on justice or cop problems and a continued erosion of civil liberties under Obama. And picking Biden as his vp was cynical and gifted Biden tremendous soft power that he didnt earn. The price for that turned out to be a whole lot of brown mans’ blood spilled, and a terrible erosion of the western rules based order and the concept of democracy, and its not over yet. I guess I’m happy Obama was as good as he was, but man, what a missed opportunity for Obama to brand away from the dem centrism that increasingly is simply republican-light. If you had suggested in 2010 that Bdien being president would result in a lot of dead non-whites, closed border, and Roe going down in flames, it would have been spot on 5x5 Bidens stated policy choices. He’s always been anti choice, pro-police-thuggery, and anti minority for 50 years, but so many dems are pretending he’s jesus christ returned.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 386K

    Comments