First: are you intentionally misrepresenting what the ‘far left’ (hah! as if there is one in the United States) is saying about Obama? Or are you really simply tone deaf? Here, I’ll spell it out for you: if someone retires from Congress, where they did a bunch of things that were amazingly helpful for the oil industry, and then immediately get offered a million dollars a year for a 10-hour-a-month job in the oil industry, then people get riled. Yes, they aren’t in politics any more, but it sure looks an awful lot like they are being rewarded for their good service. Are you saying that you don’t get at all upset when Republicans do that? Obama was pretty good for Wall Street, all things considered: sure, he did sign some regulations right at the beginning that made it less possible for them to destroy the entire world economy again, but by and large, when he could have take the opportunity to actually advocate for real effective regulation and actual prosecution of bank executives and so forth, he instead did absolutely nothing. He was GREAT for Wall Street. And now he’s on track to earn millions of speaker’s fees, and I have no doubt will be sitting on some boards before the end of 2018.
And let’s be honest: in his case this was not corruption. He believed, and believes, that what’s good for Wall Street is good for America, and that what the bank executives did isn’t really worthy of jail time, since everyone was doing it and eh, who knew that it was going to destroy the economy? Sure, it was illegal, but they didn’t know it was *wrong*. Or what the fuck ever. Obama said, over and over, that he would have been a moderate Republican, 25 years earlier. Everyone refused to listen to him when he was campaigning. People like you STILL refuse to listen to him.
Second: “The rebuttal will be, well, the money is corporate, the money is from Wall Street. Well, nobody in the far left was coming for Sanders when he invested his money on Wall Street. Nobody on the far left was coming for The Young Turks when they took $4 million from Republicans.”
Okay. So let’s just ignore the ‘invest your money in Wall Street’ argument, because you can’t possibly expect your readers to take it seriously as an argument. ‘The rebuttal will be, well, the money was coming from grossly polluting industries. Well, nobody was coming for Sanders when he URINATED IN FRESH WATER.’
Instead, I’d like to focus on the fact that you think somehow that The Young Turks are ‘ultra-leftists’. Because although this is a hilarious misrepresentation (Cenk Uygur is a semi-leftist libertarian who calls himself a progressive but does not actually like much in the way of progressive policies, and is also a denier of the Armenian Genocide, to pick an example at random who just happens to HEAD THE ENTIRE THING) some people might actually believe it. Honestly, Uygur had other reasons for backing Sanders, and they weren’t hard to see if you ever actually watched his show.
Look, I get it. Everyone who is at all politically aware in the United States has one thing in common: the only thing they hate more than people who are far to the right of them on the political spectrum is people who are even the slightest bit to the left of them. (Mostly they assume that anyone further left of them must be a liar/grifter, but ‘lunatic’ and ‘wildly gullible’ are also acceptable.) And so any failure on the part of their party, no matter how small, must be the fault of those to their left. It’s the one thing that is absolutely universal between the two political parties, and it’s why whenever the ‘center’ of American politics moves, it is ALWAYS to the right. You can’t help this any more than anyone else, it’s just a gut reaction. I’m certainly not immune: I’m just so far left that there really aren’t that many people around for me to hate. Certainly I’m farther left than Sanders.
But it’s not a race thing. It’s just that Clinton was slightly to the right of the average black person, and Sanders was slightly to the left, and so everyone knew instintively and automatically who to hate.