> In 2008, Obama got elected on a promise of change, but by-and-large just did more of the same After 2010 midterms he couldn't really do anything, because the

> In 2008, Obama got elected on a promise of change, but by-and-large just did more of the same After 2010 midterms he couldn't really do anything, because the GOP did everything they could to obstruct everything, seemingly mostly just as a nihilistic power game. If you will recall, even very simple and uncontroversial appointments were being blocked. It was absolutely ridiculous. I don't especially like the democratic party, but there is no real comparison. Both a forceful push and several punched to the face are assault, but clearly they are not the same or "every bit as guilty". In the first two years, when he was actually empowered, he mainly focused on the financial crisis and the ACA. Those two were already massive undertakings. Also Afghanistan was not "Vietnam 2.0". About 280,000 US troops died in Vietnam. About 3,500 coalition troops died in Afghanistan, most of them in the early years. 2020 saw 11 casualties. Comparisons to Vietnam are profoundly unserious. There's a reason Obama stayed in Afghanistan: it was relatively cheap and kept an enemy (Taliban) in check. Now, you can agree or disagree with that, but it's really not as straight-forward as you're presenting it.