Jesus fucking christ, really? I've got mayonnaise older than this fucking presidential term and we're already excoriating Obama for his "legacy?" I love how the exact same organizations that berate and belittle the banks for having all the power and influence will berate and belittle anyone who takes money for talking to them.But when he left the Oval Office for the final time – leaving it in the tiny hands of the very racist who had demanded his birth certificate – I fantasized that he’d join us on the front lines of marches, battle for the salvation of Obamacare in ingenious ways, and maybe turn up at a Black Lives Matter event.
Man. If there is any evidence that we live in a really weird, polarized time, it's how people talk about Obama. I was gonna make a comment earlier but failed to be eloquent about it and it basically boils down to any commentary on him is either absolutely praiseworthy or absolutely condemning, and the praises and condemnation comes from both ends of the political spectrum, and very few concessions are given. During his eight years of presidency, I got called wishy-washy so many times when conversations came up about him, because I would talk about things he did that I thought were awful and things about him that I thought were great, and people really wanted me to pick one side or the other and stick with it. Some stuff I thought he was at fault for personally. Some stuff I understood weren't his fault, but were the fault of a shitty system. Some times I think he went too far. Other times, I think he didn't go far enough. I think maybe the fact that I didn't absolutely loved or hated him showed he did an ok job as a president, but man, the stuff he did that made me angry really made me angry and the stuff that he did that I liked I really liked and eight years is a long time and I can't remember the majority of the stuff he did so I sometimes don't know if it really impacted me all that much. In short, if you're a public figure in today's society, chances are, you can't win them all.
This attitude seems to be really common. I've had a few discussions with close friends recently who feel as you do, and we all agree that whenever we voice any kind of "in-between" position, or just talk about the good and the bad in equal measure, that people tend to view it as sitting on the fence and not picking a side, as if life is supposed to be as simple as a game of football.I got called wishy-washy so many times when conversations came up about him, because I would talk about things he did that I thought were awful and things about him that I thought were great, and people really wanted me to pick one side or the other and stick with it.
Most people are staunch partisans, above all else. If you do anything to challenge the black and white, team-based nature of politics, it is seen as a personal attack against their fundamental beliefs. It's why moderates or centrists receive a double helping of scorn from each party. The only thing more threatening to a Democrat than a Republican, is someone who challenges their two-party oligarchy.
Maybe fifteen years back Jon Stewart pointed out that politics is dominated by extremists because most people have better shit to do with their time. I think it's fair to say that most people are disinterested above all else. The people who are interested are generally interested tribally - it's rare you find someone who likes to watch sports but has no favorite teams.
So, it wasn't that people's policies were extremist but their views on things? That makes sense, now that I think about it. Many people of both parties (haven't seen much Dems, though) are utterly stubborn about the way things are supposed to be done all around the board.
What amazes me are the people who can rail against Obama for not accomplishing more liberal shit AND rail against the congresscritters and the nazi gestapo goosestepping Republican Party and not recognize that Obama? He had to legislate through that shit.