12 ms·

>which is because it did not have a catastrophic outcome at the time The problem with that statement is that you believe it was a catastrophic outcome. For the

>which is because it did not have a catastrophic outcome at the time The problem with that statement is that you believe it was a catastrophic outcome. For the first time in history, media and new technology is able to instantly tell you if the president has so much as sneezed while the sitting president is a (highly controversial) Republican. Obama was considered a nightmare scenario for the American right, and if you listened to the right outlets, you heard every single one of Obama's missteps. Every poor decision, embarrassing association, or undelivered promise was constantly paraded as grounds for impeachment, but social media and what many consider "neutral" news sources have a noticeable progressive bent, and the Obama administration got the benefit of the doubt more often than not. The Obama administration deported more undocumented immigrants than every past president minus HW Bush combined. The Obama administration killed over 3700 people (over 300 of which were civilians) in drone strikes. In that regard, Obama reportedly said that it "Turns out I’m really good at killing people. Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine." Attorney General Eric Holder was the first US cabinet member to be held in contempt of Congress, and Obama exercised executive privilege to support Holder's decision to withhold documents pertaining to Fast and Furious. Most US citizens who actively use social media don't know those things (among many other controversies) happened, but they sure as shit know that "Donald Trump gets two scoops of ice cream", and constantly beat the dead "covfefe" horse; you can swipe right on Snapchat or Twitter to that social media company's curated news page and instantly hear every single slip-up and hot take that Trump has. This notion of a "catastrophic outcome" largely exists because for the first time, news outlets are at odds with the administration in the age of mass media.

zzzeek 9y ago
The drone strikes we're widely reported, everyone knew about them and the American right was completely in favor of them. They were also in favor of the deportations which we liberals are also well aware of. Fast and furious was widely reported. You've basically listed all the major disasters of Obama's presidency (the day to day bullshit listed on talk radio is just that) and there is simply no comparison to what is happening now and the things you refer to were also widely reported by the media. It is of course a rote and entirely predictable exercise to take my statement that "this is a catastrophe", turn it around and say, "well Obama was a catastrophe for the right". I'm here to say that this is a false equivalency and the right has lost its mind. The conservative view of Obama is equivalent to the liberal view of Bush, that's a lot more reasonable. But the right has not has their "liberal Trump", and it is perfectly fine that they never will.

zzzeek 9y ago

The drone strikes we're widely reported, everyone knew about them and the American right was completely in favor of them. They were also in favor of the deportations which we liberals are also well aware of. Fast and furious was widely reported. You've basically listed all the major disasters of Obama's presidency (the day to day bullshit listed on talk radio is just that) and there is simply no comparison to what is happening now and the things you refer to were also widely reported by the media. It is of course a rote and entirely predictable exercise to take my statement that "this is a catastrophe", turn it around and say, "well Obama was a catastrophe for the right". I'm here to say that this is a false equivalency and the right has lost its mind. The conservative view of Obama is equivalent to the liberal view of Bush, that's a lot more reasonable. But the right has not has their "liberal Trump", and it is perfectly fine that they never will.