7 ms·
To Obama with Love, and Hate, and Desperation
- cyberferret 10y agoVery interesting read - I am halfway through it. I wonder if the new POTUS will keep the same tradition of having 10 letters each day added to his daily briefing? NOTE: Not a snarky comment. Just genuinely curious query if this is a 'thing' that all past presidents did, and future ones will?
- dkarapetyan 10y agoYou mean the orange oompa loompa narcissist? No way in hell this continues. I think one reason he got elected is that people projected attributes onto him that just don't exist in the man. Economic frustration is a hell of a drug. The article on the other hand shows why Obama was a good president. The guy was a well-rounded human being that truly wanted to make a connection and make things better for people. He didn't just want to win. He certainly had his own shortcomings and probably made a few policy missteps here and there but I don't see an article like this being written for Trump's tenure.
- jakeogh 10y agoDisparaging people because of their skin color? So tolerant!
- chiaro 10y agoFor subscribing to an ideology so strongly against faux outrage, y'all sure do peddle a lot of it.
- jakeogh 10y agoWouldn't bother if the other side was not so hypocritical. It is interesting that it's just fine to make fun of someone's skin color if you identify with the faux outrage side. Name-calling is such a hallmark of Trumps opposition, it's hard to not point it out.
- chiaro 10y agoBeyond the point that one might hold a pseudonymous internet forum and the leader of the free world to slightly different standards, you're erasing an awful lot of context around what comments about skin colour mean in each case.
- jakeogh 10y agoI don't want to put words in your mouth, please elaborate on the context I am erasing. Are you arguing intent?
- husgfdsr3 10y agoI thought body shaming was something we were taught to avoid? Does this recommendation now come with conditionals?
- woofyman 10y agoIt's a fake tan, not his skin color.
- mattlevan 10y agoSad that HN allows obviously hostile comments like these to remain... Anyways, Trump listened to America. He listened quite a bit. He not only visited and spoke to hundreds of thousands of people all over the country, but he held multiple (7 was his max) rallies everyday near the end of his campaign. He also frequently sent long, detailed surveys (with both multiple choice and text box questions) to gauge public opinion. On the contrary, Hillary was the candidate who failed to interact: from the lack of press conferences to lack of media interviews to lack of rallies to lack of presence in many states, Hillary's loss is arguably a direct reflection of her failed engagement with American people. Edit: Here come the down votes.
- fingerprinter 10y agoI will never understand any defence of Trump in 2017, At this point, it's not about Hillary, it's all about Trump. It should be about who he is, what he is doing, what he is saying and what he plans to do. And we have enough data to unequivocally reject the man as well as his rhetoric. Look at his cabinet. Look at his twitter feed. Look at this constant stream of lies. See how unprepared he is. Skate to where the puck is going and see how this ends. In the time from when he won (by being the biggest losing winner) to when his actions taking office, there is literally no defence of this man. He might have listened, and he heard exactly what he needed to say to his "marks" (this would be his term from the Art of the Deal) to win and then he got on with his real agenda: making himself and his friends obscenely wealthy at the expense of the rest of America and the world.
- mattlevan 10y agoWouldn't he have quickly shuffled the US into signing the TPP, then, rather than boldly rejecting it (which was confirmed by WikiLeaks/Asian press today)? https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/823036353986359296 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/823036353986359296
- fingerprinter 10y agoFew things: 1. Skate to where the puck is going 2. There is more than one way to make money 3. Trump still hasn't a. released his tax records and b. divested himself of his conflicts of interest Combine these three and it's quite easy to see how dumping the TPP theoretically benefits Trump and his friends quite well.
- faitswulff 10y agoRelevant tweet regarding projection: https://twitter.com/jwilcox79/status/822150802928259073 https://twitter.com/jwilcox79/status/822150802928259073
- cyberferret 10y agoI hear you, and my thoughts echo yours. But I did want to keep the conversation on point and civil. If the currently elected president is indeed serious about his election platform of 'for the people', then he should be probably using the letters 'from the people' as his reference base to keep an eye on the pulse 'of the people'...
- mattlevan 10y agoHe wrote a "Contract with the American Voter", you know. www.track-trump.com
- joezydeco 10y agoMy biggest disappointment in Obama is that he spent 8 years trying politely to move things ahead where he could, while the opposing party decided on day one to completely reject any idea of compromise with him and say no to everything, even as the country headed towards depression.
- fingerprinter 10y agoI'm amazed anyone who has watched the last two decades of politics unfold can honestly see the modern incarnation of the republican party as anything other than a Saturday morning cartoon villain. Every time there is a decision to be made, it seems the Republican thought process is "How can I personally benefit most from this?" and "What is the most evil thing I can do in this scenario?". Yes, that is hyperbolic a bit, but it's not far off. Just look at the last two days and the first press conference, the KellyAnne Conway "alternate facts" quip as well as her insinuating that unless the press gets in line, they might be cut out. Look at the currently assembled cabinet. Look at Kansas and see how any of these policies will play out. The freakin' wall. Anyway. I don't get it. I understand some people just vote religion or whatever some TV channel tells them too. I just don't understand how people can fall for it. I really don't understand how someone on this site could possibly not see through all that smoke.
- DefaultUserHN 10y ago
- geomark 10y agoAren't the Trump haters also projecting? And the Obama lovers as well. Obama is a smooth talker versus the crude talk of Trump. Obama's actions were dispicable. It remains to be seen if Trump's can reach that level.
- cyberferret 10y ago> Obama's actions were dispicable Dictionary definition of 'despicable': "deserving hatred and contempt." Really? I can think of many other leaders and people whose actions I would find despicable, but I don't see how that can apply to the 44th President as an all encompassing label? If you have actually read the article, and still think that, then I really don't know how we can even begin to discuss this in any sort of meaningful manner.
- geomark 10y agoBeing responsible for killing many kids over a long period of time is near the top of my list of despicable. If it's not near the top of yours then I agree we don't have any basis for a discussion. Edit: Obama isn't the only one who thinks it's ok to kill kids in pursuit of their goals. Remeber when Madeleine Albright said it was worth the price of the death of 500,000 children to get Saddam? [1]. Obama is right up there with her. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE
- cmdrfred 10y agoHis actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and Syria are despicable to me. As well as increases in the surveillance state, making the Bush "tax cuts for the rich" permanent, overthrowing a democratically elected government in Honduras, torture of whistleblowers (as opposed to going after those who extra judicially killed journalists in Iraq), and keeping Gitmo open.
- Inconel 10y agoI consider the continued expansion of mass surveillance to fit my definition of despicable. Drone strikes, particularly those directed at US citizens without trial, are also troubling for me. Obviously, Obama is neither the first nor last President who I would label as such.
- dingo_bat 10y ago> orange oompa loompa narcissist Name calling is the worst argument.
- MaysonL 10y agoSo why does Trump do so much of it?
- dingo_bat 10y agoThat's irrelevant. I am evaluating the comment on the merit of the argument contained within it.
- DefaultUserHN 10y ago>So why does Trump do so much of it? If you haven't noticed before, Trump never attack/insult people first. Trump only defend himself when other people attack/insult him. For example, John Lewis attacked Trump's legitimacy, so he attacked Lewis's incompetence back. All these people, they attacked Trump, and then they get angry that Trump attacked back. When will they learn: Don't attack Trump and Trump won't attack you back. It's that simple. If you're going to dish it out, you better be ready to receive it too.
- pcwalton 10y ago> If you haven't noticed before, Trump never attack/insult people first. Nobody has noticed that, because it's not true. Curiel, to name the first counterexample that came to my head. There are hundreds more examples, which are a Google search away.
- DefaultUserHN 10y agoBut he didn't attack Curiel. He said that Curiel may have an interest of conflict, you know, just like how people kept saying Trump's business may be a conflict of interest. People are allowed to criticize Trump's conflict of interest, but Trump is not allow to their conflicts of interest? This, again, is why Trump the U.S. election. People are tired of the cry-bullies trying to censor everyone.
- rdtsc 10y ago> I think one reason he got elected is that people projected attributes onto him that just don't exist in the man. People projected onto Obama even harder. Remember the hope and change? I do. What has Obama done for the Black community who voted pretty much as a block for him? Have the inner cities improved significantly in 8 years? > made a few policy missteps here and there Syria, Arab Spring mess, meddling in and then having Ukraine loose Crimea. A constant drone war (after preemptively receiving a Nobel Peace prize), increased surveillance, persecution of whistleblowers. That's more than a few missteps. That refugee crisis in Europe wasn't an act of God, and wasn't created in the vacuum, Western intervention in the ME is a big factor there. Let's criticize Trump like we should, but that's doesn't get Obama off the hook so to speak.
- general_ai 10y agoDo you really believe he had the time to read 10 letters every day? Even at 5 minutes per letter that'd take 50 minutes. I just don't see how that's possible.
- cyberferret 10y agoI learned long ago that what I do, or do not believe is achievable, is not applicable to 99.99999% of the general population.
- d23 10y agoI'm not sure why you're putting 5 minutes per letter in there. I'm sure he's a well-read guy. It's not crazy to think he could get through a one page letter in a minute or less.
- general_ai 10y agoSome people receive responses, so if he wrote them himself you need to factor that in as well.
- hirsin 10y agoFTA - he sent notes back in the margins for responses, and only occasionally wrote letters back personally.
- nicpottier 10y agoThe article has sample letters, they don't seem overly long. Maybe figure 3 minutes average? So closer to 30? Don't see any reason we should doubt it considering the apparatus that was in place to make sure he could and it was a stated goal.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- anigbrowl 10y agoNorms and tradition are at the bottom of the incoming administration's priorities, as far as I can see.
- vinhboy 10y agoA lot of people in this country really hates Obama. And it seems, when you take out all the other ugliness, they base that hate on the idea that he is not genuine. > President Obama was the first to come up with a deliberate and explicit practice of 10 letters every day. But reading things like this, and a myriad of other things about Obama, I think that if you could scientifically quantify genuineness, Obama would rank at the very top. So I find it really offensive when people attack the man on his integrity. You can attack his policy, but if you attack the man, I can not, and will not, agree with you.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- agumonkey 10y agoSeems like Obama was put on a spot more than other presidents. He could say the right things, act the right way[1]; yet if at any point something negative came (drones, nsa) he would be bashed generously. People expect A+ from him and scream at an A-. The sad part is that Trump is said to have been elected because he was felt like a true person; I understand their sentiment, his mouth seems unfiltered, so he's a true nasty person but people still prefer that to someone that looks like 90% good samaritan. [1] you can find lots of videos where he would adress antagonistic crowds peacefully and wisely. Lots of times where he showed caring (his behavior toward his wife) and a sane personality (cracking turkey jokes with his daugthers).
- rdtsc 10y ago> Seems like Obama was put on a spot more than other presidents. Another element there is the benchmark against which he set himself up for -- Hope and Change. I remember having a lot of hope and now after 8 years, it feels kid of "meh". There were some good things, but also a lot of blunders. I guess I shouldn't expect much from that political office. Not sure about Trump. Having lived in the Rust Belt I can see how people there understand and follow him. And I heard he just withdrew from TPP, not bad so far.
- benihana 10y ago
- umberway 10y agoIt seems to me (as an outsider) that people in the U.S.A. now more than ever judge the President for what he symbolises. Perhaps this explains the power of constitutional monarchy (not advocating one system over the other; just an observation).
- bigger_cheese 10y agoAs someone who lives in a constitutional monarchy (Australia). The Royal family is largely seen as a bit of an odd quirk the Queen's head is stamped on the back of our coins but other than that it means very little to most people. I honestly don't know the name of our current Governor General. One thing that stands out to me is American's seem to have more respect towards elected officials then we do here. For example the sample letters in the article all address Obama as "Sir" or "Mr President". I cannot imagine people addressing our Prime Minister that Formally/politely. I think it is a cultural issue most people here tend to be very cynical about government and distrustful of politicians.
- umberway 10y ago>Queen's head is stamped on the back of our coins Exactly. She's a symbol :-)
- alistproducer2 10y agoI seriously hate political articles on HN. There are enough places in the net where you can finger-argue with strangers. Can't we just let HN be a place where we come to learn an talk about tech an tech business?
- camel_Snake 10y agoHere's a simple solution: don't click the links or comments. It's what everyone else does with article subjects they don't care for.
- alistproducer2 10y agoSo by your own standards, you like political topics on here? Why? At best, they're mental masturbation. At worst, they're troll fests.
- nindalf 10y agoI wouldn't have considered myself an emotional person, but some of those letters touched me deeply. The anonymous letter from the partner of a soldier brought me to tears. I have often disagreed with Obama's policies and criticised him for his actions on drone strikes and mass surveillance. However I am now certain I could not do a better job than he did if I can't even read all the mail he got without crying. Edit - the rationale behind some of his decisions is clearer. For example, he commuted more sentences than any other President. You would do that if you're reading mail from inmates and their relatives and friends on a regular basis. If you take the opposite approach and avoid such letters its much easier to insulate yourself from "criminals", telling yourself that they probably deserve to be where they are. Similarly with engaging in the drone war and avoiding engagement in Syria. I hate the fact that so many innocent Yemenis and Pakistanis died in the drone war, but it makes sense that he would be much more cautious about deploying boots on the ground if he was regualarly reading the mail sent by servicemen and their families.
- sgentle 10y agoOne of my favourite reads on politics in a long while. "These were people writing, and you’re a person reading, and the president is a person." But of course the president isn't just a person. The tone in his voice moves the stock market, and the stroke of his pen can kill or save millions. And a person is a person, but the people? They're a mass of voices so loud and chaotic that you would go instantly mad if you could ever truly hear them all. So the aloofness, the distance, the abstraction of governance is a symptom, not a cause, of inhumanity. It's telling that to break through it in the smallest way, just 10 letters to simulate a sense of personal connection between the president and the people, takes "50 staff members, 36 interns and a rotating roster of 300 volunteers". Any time we talk about having a beer with the president, it's important to remember that this isn't your buddy, this is the avatar of the world's most powerful and dangerous political machinery. It's like a surgeon taking the time to joke around with you before he describes how he's going to bisect your ribcage. It's a nice gesture, but we still get our surgeons from medical school, not clown college.
- Tulip68 10y agoDamn I'm going to miss this guy. I realize HN deserves a higher level of discourse, but it's just got to be said: Fuck Drumpf.