Democrats Have a Real Problem, Part V
Barack Obama
Where is former President Barack Obama?
Since leaving office, the 44th President of the United States has ghosted us. Sure, he’s popped up on lavish vacations with billionaires or mega-millionaires and to give lucrative speeches to donor-class types and to admonish the super-wealthy for living too lavishly before dropping $12 million on a seven-bedroom mansion in Martha’s Vineyard (which actually has one less bedroom than the Obamas’ other mansion). But nary a political word has been heard since early 2017.
Granted, that sort of privacy and insulation from the common folk are the right of every private person worth tens of millions of dollars. Obama is no different; he paid more than his share of dues over eight years in the White House. If he wants to enjoy the fruits of that white-hot spotlight, then yes he can.
Except, of course, Obama’s absence from the public stage presents a major problem for Democrats based on these two facts:
- The Democratic Party treats Barack Obama as if he walks on water—According to Gallup, Obama’s approval rating never dipped below 74% among his own party during his presidency and it lounged at 95% when he left office. Various other polls and surveys confirm his nearly sainted status amongst self-identified Democrats to this day. He is so beloved that Michelle Obama could announce her candidacy for president tomorrow and she’d be taken seriously purely by virtue of being his wife.
- The Democratic Party tells us Donald Trump is a racist, misogynistic, xenophobic, proto-Hitler who poses an existential threat to democracy—And its proxies tell us so on a daily basis. The 45th POTUS boasts an approval rating amongst self-identified Democrats that is basically the inverse of his predecessor’s. The man is so reviled that obviously rotten-to-the-core narcissists like Michael Avenatti can get taken seriously as a presidential candidate by outlets like CNN purely by virtue of attacking Trump.
Clearly, Fact №1 and Fact №2 are mutually exclusive in light of ex-President Obama’s silence on the state of US politics. In the Democrats’ world, it is impossible for Donnie to be spewing bigotry and destroying the republic while Barack shrugs and focuses on getting paid. There is no way an individual as Good as the Democrats’ version of Obama would or could stay silent under the threat of an individual as Bad as the Democrats’ version of Trump. Either Obama isn’t an infallible leader or Trump isn’t evil or both; there is no fourth option (spoiler alert: it’s both).
Worse for the Democrats, however, is that Obama’s silence is not an isolated example of this glaring inconsistency. Indeed, it is emblematic of the party’s behavior being at odds with their portrayal of Trump.
Think of Nancy Pelosi rushing the impeachment inquiry through the House of Representatives without hearing from the primary witnesses rather than using the courts to compel them to testify. At the time, the stated rationale for the delay was the same as the stated rationale for the impeachment i.e. that Trump presented too imminent a threat to America’s democracy (specifically, the 2020 election). Pelosi then did precisely what she said the House didn’t have time to do; she delayed by sitting on the articles of impeachment for about a month trying to force the Senate to call those exact same witnesses. Rushing the inquiry and then refusing to transmit the articles while trying to get the Senate to do what the House chose not to do definitely served a political purpose. But it served only a political purpose since an impeachment inquiry lacking testimony from primary witnesses was as transparently futile as trying to force Mitch McConnell’s hand in the Senate despite zero leverage.
The decision to move forward without the witnesses was a decision to play politics at the expense of building the strongest case to remove Trump. How could Nancy and friends defend that decision if their portrayal of Trump is sincere?
Likewise, look at the absurdly large and fractured field of Democratic candidates for POTUS even at this late date. Does anyone outside the Democrat echo chamber really believe so many long-shot candidates would’ve been allowed to throw their hats in the ring if the party honestly believed there was a modern-day mix of George Wallace and Adolf Hitler sitting in the White House? Does anyone believe these same candidates—most of whom never had a chance to win and certainly don’t now that Bernie Sanders has emerged as the strong front-runner—would be knifing each other in the back over relatively minor policy differences with the Wallace-Hitler hybrid looming over the landscape? Hell no.
Unfortunately, the party will have to sacrifice Obama’s reputation if they want their walk to match their talk. Party leadership has staked its hopes of taking down Trump on portraying him as too hateful and too dangerous to leave in office. Party leaders and the rank and file have spent the last four years hammering away relentlessly at Trump’s conduct and character, only tangentially attacking his policy when seen as evidence of his personal corruption. It is far, far too late in the game to abandon the approach now.
The Democrats’ entire strategy for beating Donald Trump relies on convincing voters that he is a uniquely malignant, bigoted threat to the American republic. Yet their own behavior, including that of their godhead, belies the accusation. This is a real problem.
