338
Obama encourages Democrats to focus on winning back House, not "tactical differences"
(www.cbsnews.com)
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2025
338 points (97.5% liked)
politics
31071 readers
2796 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And when a Dem wins the presidential election they nominate a chair and the DNC vote is performative...
Obama could have named anyone, going off memory but the first time he didn't nominate at all, and the second time was for the neoliberal who gave 2016 to Hillary, likely at Biden's recommendation.
And you're making my point, trump couldn't have beaten anyone in a fair election, the only two times he's won and when Dems had rigged primaries to force historically unpopular candidates.
Biden even managed to beat him, like 40 years after his first disasterous primary. That's my point, Bernie would have stomped trump.
Trump polled more historically unpopular than Clinton and Harris, and one of the main points of discussion to follow was how incongruent the polling was with the votes. You can't Monday morning quarterback this productively. And in any case, it sidesteps my point. Were Clinton and Harris great candidates? No. In a well America, should they still have beaten Trump handily? Absolutely. We're not well, as a nation, and you can't lay that at Obama's feet.
Buddy...
You're acting like we didn't know Bernie was a stronger candidate during the primary...
Things don't magically become real these one you admit them, they're true before you realize it too
You should continue that quote.
The very end?
You saying people can't follow logic to it's logical conclusion...
Because you don't agree with it? Then try to use logic.
Don't just insist that reality was different so you get your warm and fuzzies.
And absolut shit ton of people were ringing alarm bells not just in 2016 during the primary, but back in 2008 when Obama and the party instead of seizing it.
It's oke you just started paying attention, I'm sincerely glad. But stop fucking acting like nothing was realized before you personally did so that's the shit trump does with his "nobody knows" and you won't stop saying "nobody knew" despite a shit ton of us, and we weren't exactly shy about it.
This is not a puzzle I'm trying to get you to solve. You needn't hypothesize about intention or my experience or alternate histories. I'm literally saying:
The issues people have with Clinton and Harris, however valid they may be, do not amount to a reason to vote for Trump or refrain from voting. That is the disconnect from reality that I'm addressing.
Bernie polled well with a segment of voters who ended up going to trump. That would have turned the whole race. Instead we had Clinton's baggage and corporate puppetry running against a guy who represented the puppeteers.