Democrats lost over 1,000 seats under Obama


President Obama claims he could have won a third term if he had been allowed to run – but even if he’s right, his coattails haven’t done much for the rest of his party.

While Obama’s tireless campaigning, broad demographic appeal and message of “hope” and “change” helped propel him to two terms in the White House, his skills on the stump haven’t translated down the ballot.

The Democratic Party suffered huge losses at every level during Obama’s West Wing tenure.


Just throwing this out there for analysis: perhaps he could have won a third term, because black voters would have come out en masse for him (as they didn’t for Hillary)?


I think you have something, though the campaign would have been different in other aspects If he had made a third term, the State losses would have continued due to his anemic economic policies. At least now the Dems have someone else to blame, someone to campaign against.


We’ve basically had a gridlock for the last six years. I can’t say that was a bad thing in retrospect.


Obama is very personable; he has charisma. I think even more than Bill Clinton, who had the problems with scandals, etc. Obama is a decent family man and a committed very hard left ideologue. I think he believes in what he does; he is not particularly original or spontaneous or unconventional. I like him when he talks. He is articulate and well-mannered. His politics sit very safely on the (relatively affluent white) academic hard left.

I get why black America admires his success; it would be hard not to from their perspective. But I think they should also be able to criticize him. If I were black, I think I would be working hard to distance myself and my people from Obama as President. Come up with a new face fast.

Remember all those charges of racism when people criticized Obama? You saw it when Trump won the election, liberal commentators like Bernstein alleging that (white) America just could not handle a black President. I find this kind of rhetoric disturbing - I see white guilt in it. (which to me doesn’t amount to much more than thinly veiled racism) An inability to hold Obama responsible for his failings as a leader, his divisiveness, radical ideology, inability to compromise, negotiate, see other perspectives as anything other than ‘evil’ or ‘hate’ - defenders like Bernstein just keep dancing around the ‘he’s a black victim’ argument. Not good when you have to resort to that stuff about somebody’s performance or weakness. Lower the bar as low as you possibly can. It’s called (benign) racism. Scares me to see that so widespread on the left.


We’ve got 2-4yrs of action before the GOP can lose control, we’ll see what they can accomplish before gridlock sets in again. GOP could retain the congress but lose POTUS, dems will be highly motivated and funded by 2020.

Trump needs to make serious inroads into winning/retaining a segment of the black/hispanic vote. If he can break up the monopoly then maybe the discussion will focus more on issues than divisive rhetoric.


I would be willing to bet that a lot of people who voted for Trump previously voted for Obama twice, and what swayed them was distrust of Hillary Clinton.


Hopefully this won’t be a resumption of the same policies which drove us into two unfunded wars and a banking and market collapse of deepest proportions.

Trump needs to make serious inroads into winning/retaining a segment of the black/hispanic vote. If he can break up the monopoly then maybe the discussion will focus more on issues than divisive rhetoric.

Trump is a big-city guy and by himself he probably could win their hearts. But as a nominal Republican, whose Congressional leadership has shown no particular love for high-density infrastructures, he might have to reach out to the Democrats for support. Who knows, he might just get it from Sanders and others.


Well Trump is the guy who builds towers, and he might be the proper guy to really counteract the 9/11…He is the guy who will ask the adversary to pay for the war expenses, and not put them on people so a president might be admired by the world for political correctness


Bush I had Kuwait pay for the Gulf War. When the money ran out he declared victory and got out. His son waged war on two countries and we are still paying for it.


Apples and Oranges, and something undefined.

  • In Kuwait, we were coming to aid of an ally, so their dime
  • In Afghanistan, we were responding to an attack, so our dime
  • Iraq was the questionable one, since no straight up threat.


Point is that these latter wars were unfunded.

What would have happened had the US not had the ability to print money or borrow from foreigners?

But the mere suggestion that some kind of tax increase or surtax is in order seems to punish those running for office. (One of the reasons I brought up Bush I here.)


I was never strong in American history, but didn’t we go into debt over the Revolutionary war as well? I thought we had to borrow for it. I guess I’m wondering if people think going into debt over war is new? Someone feel free to sharpen my history.


I would also guess that some of the Hillary voters would have swung the other way for the same reason and many more because they were just tired of him.

There some analysis suggesting that Trump could have defeated Obama/Biden even in 2012. All Romney would’ve needed was 300,000 in four larger swing states.


I doubt many of the liberal Democrats even noticed how much support they had lost across the country until they lost the Presidency. It fits their view that everything should be ruled from the top by their small group of people who are smarter than everyone else and rarely listen to anyone who might have a different opinion.


They probably forgot that they needed a substantial number of bluedog Democrats in 2006 and 2008 to claim the majority in both chambers. The loss of these bluedogs was severe.


Since the beginning of civilization debt has been realized as long as credit was extended. I imagine most of it was paid with other goods or services. Or with silver and gold or currency backed by silver and gold. Or copper or nickel and so forth. This is no longer the case.


I think they are just waking up to the realization they’ve lost most their local power (1k seats), it’ll take a while longer before they start to hold their leadership accountable. We can tell much from whom they pick next to run the DNC.

closed #19

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit