According a Gallup poll, George W. Bush’s
average approval rating during his second term as President of the United States was
an unsightly 37%, and it fell to as low as 25% near the end of his term. Riding the wave of disappointment with Bush,
the Democrats easily took control of both the House and the Senate in 2006, and also
won a majority of other local elections as well. These victories were capped off with a convincing
Presidential win by Democratic contender Barack Obama in 2008. So with a significant Democratic majority
in Congress, you’d think that Obama could easily get any of his policy proposals on
the table, and in many cases he did. But one of the central messages of Obama’s
campaign was unity and non-partisanship, and perhaps this was the experiment that Obama
tried during his presidency. Instead of going hard on the progressive policy
that he and his party wanted to enact, he would try to work with Republicans and attempt
to ease the growing disorder within Congress. Unfortunately for him, he became President
during one of the sharpest escalations of political division in America, driven largely
by an uptick in hysterical conservative propaganda from outlets like Fox News, as well as the
Republicans in Congress choosing to adopt a strategy of absolute obstruction and anti-'Obama-ism.' Hi I’m T1J! [WEIRD VOICE:] Follow me! So, after the lopsided Democratic victories
in 2006 and 2008, the Republicans were in kind of an awkward spot. But it didn’t take Republican leaders very
long to craft a strategy. They wouldn’t break bread with the Democratic
majority, nor would they brainstorm ways to repair their brand. Instead, the strategy was to fight. And the way they were going to fight was to
oppose, obstruct, and defame this President as much as humanly possible. Basically, in no way could Obama be perceived
as a winner. If any of his policy were to be passed it
would be with no help from the Republicans. I also don’t think it’s a coincidence
that the first black President was the recipient of such unprecedented malice. A lot of people unironically marked the election
of Barack Obama as an indication that racism had largely ended. But in my view, this idea is quickly disproven
when considering the sheer unprecedented animosity and disrespect Obama received from not only
the public and the conservative media, but also from actual high level politicians. The Republicans refused to meet Obama in the
middle on anything, even things they used to support before Obama became associated
with them, like tax cuts for small businesses, or expansion of unemployment benefits. They condoned, if not encouraged absurd rumors
about Obama being Kenyan or Muslim; or giving out “Obamaphones” to welfare recipients. They voted almost unanimously on almost every
piece of legislation put in front of them, and viciously attacked any Republican who
didn’t fall in line, such as the late Senator Arlen Specter, who was actually driven to
completely switch parties after falling out with the GOP. And this isn’t just speculation by the way--the
Republican strategy of opposing everything Obama said and did is well known at this point
and has been confirmed by many people who were involved in the party at the time. One result of this obstruction was many of
Obama’s bills being killed in the Senate, such as the famous cap and trade bill which
was designed to incentivize companies to reduce carbon emissions. Although the Democrats had a majority in the
Senate, they did not initially have a filibuster proof majority, which meant that Republicans
could delay or outright prevent any vote from occurring--which they made significant use
of. But what we saw more often with Obama-inspired
bills, were warped versions of his plans. Republicans succeeded in trash talking Obama’s
plans so thoroughly that some of them even saw less support among Democratic voters. The best example of this is Obama’s legacy-defining
healthcare bill, the Affordable Care Act, also known as 'Obamacare.' At this point, the Democrats had briefly achieved
a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Which you’d think would mean they could
easily pass a progressive healthcare bill. But the bill had been so thoroughly poisoned
by Republicans, that even some Democratic lawmakers didn't want to vote for it without
sweeping changes being made, such as the removal of a government funded public healthcare option. Add to that the fact the Supreme Court ruled
that states could opt out of the proposed Medicaid expansion, which would have made
access to healthcare near universal, And what you’re left with is this mangled,
ineffectual, Frankenstein-esque law with Obama’s name on it; and Republicans could just sit
back and say, “Well, none of us voted for it!” It’s kind of brilliant if I’m being honest. Now don’t get me wrong, the party that is
not in power always goes in on the President, it's the American way. Bill Clinton was impeached by the Republicans. And the Democrats weren’t exactly cordial
towards George W. Bush. But the magnitude and consistency of conservative
attacks on Obama were unparalleled, from the near unanimous opposition votes, to congressmen
literally shouting at him during his speeches. [OBAMA:] The reforms I'm proposing would not
apply to those who are here illegally. [SHOUTING OFF SCREEN:] You lie!
[audience gasps and chatter] The Republicans succeeded in tarnishing the
reputations of both Obama and the Democratic Party, causing Obama’s approval ratings
to plummet, as well as allowing Republicans to retake control of the House of Representatives
in 2010. And now with actual voting power, the Republicans
could even more effectively fight the President and his policies, with a technique even more
devious than the filibuster, the the total government shutdown. And again, this isn’t speculation—pretty
much as soon as Republicans took control of the House, leaders began calling for and encouraging
a government shutdown to basically force Obama to agree to defund Obamacare. And that’s exactly what they ended up doing. Fortunately, and I don’t want to digress
too much here, because it’s kind of complicated, but this shutdown only lasted about two weeks
and was largely considered a failure for the Republican Party, but it did show how far
they were willing to go to achieve their goals. This basically ensured that Obama would get
nothing significant done, outside of executive orders, for the remainder of his presidency. But ironically, the Republicans refusal to
meet in the middle also meant that they wouldn’t get much done either. While Republicans succeeded in diminishing
public trust in Barack Obama and increasing their influence in Congress, there was also
a growing impatience with their own inability to make good on reversing all of the President’s
policies like they said they would. Perhaps this is why Obama was able to easily
win reelection in 2012, in spite of his low approval ratings. But his victory did nothing to calm down Republican
fervor against him. They continued their unbridled obstruction
in several ways, including the aforementioned government shutdown, and refusing to allow
Obama to fill several court vacancies, including one in the Supreme Court, not to mention constant
public verbal assaults. All of these attacks continued to rile up
the Republican voter base to the point where anything that was remotely associated with
Obama was toxic. John Boehner, who was Speaker of the House
at the time, even stopped playing golf with Obama because it was alienating his conservative
supporters. But it was a double-edged sword. The rage that conservative voters had for
Obama was beginning to evolve into a mistrust of the Washington establishment altogether. The fact that the current Republicans were
unable to get much done, especially repealing Obamacare, was seen as proof that they were
just as bad and corrupt and ineffective as the Democrats. So of course, Republican politicians began
to echo this message of Washington defectiveness, and the ones that didn’t were cast aside
by the voters. [CRUZ:] ...Washington is fundamentally broken,
that there is a bipartisan corruption of career politicians in both parties... [T1J:] And this message helped a new brand
of Republicans take control of the Senate and increase their majority in the House in
2014. In hindsight, it should have been clear who
the Republican front runner would be in 2016. Essentially the person who was least like
Obama. Obama was intelligent, well-spoken, polite,
and methodical. He was a former Senator and lawyer with a
decade of political experience. And here comes a guy like Trump, an outsider
to the political sphere who says whatever is on his mind, even if it’s rude or offensive. But beyond those qualities, Trump captured
the hearts of Republican voters, by always saying exactly what they wanted to hear, even
if it is impractical or nonsensical. And what they wanted to hear is based on 8
years of the Republican Party brewing anti-Obama, and anti-Washington hysteria. And just like how the passion among Republican
voters became less about specific policies and more about general anger at the establishment,
Trump rarely mentioned the details of any actions he would take as President, he simply
said he would get things done. [TRUMP:] We will have so much winning if I
elected, that you may get bored with winning! [T1J:] He leveraged his status as a non-politician
to claim that he was the only one voters could trust. Of course the Democrats would never support
conservative policy, but the Republicans leaders had also failed. The only option, apparently, would be to put
your support behind Trump, a loose cannon from outside the political world. And when Hillary Clinton emerged as his general
election opponent, it was quite easy for him to transition the exaggerated Republican hatred
for Obama into exaggerated hatred for Clinton. Clinton, of course, worked with Obama throughout
his presidency, and she could easily be painted as just another Washington elite. Also the fact that, like Obama, she isn’t
a white man, probably helps with that. Trump would of course go on to become President,
and the actual reasons for that will be forever hotly debated, but I think it’s abundantly
clear how he rose to the top of the Republican Party. And now that the roles are reversed, and we
have an unpopular Republican President as well as Democrat-controlled House of Representatives,
the Democrats must decide how they are going to deal with Trump going forward. Clearly Trump has no interest in their agenda,
but the Republicans proved that all-out obstruction simply leads to more chaos and extremism,
and it’s not likely to be something that Democrat voters would cheer on anyway. It’s really hard to say what the best strategy
is when you’re dealing with someone as sporadic and unpredictable as Trump. And also when you’re facing a party like
the Republicans who have shown on many occasions that they are willing to not play by the rules. But Democrats have a reputation for folding
and compromising and they’re going to have to show some backbone if they want the ongoing
support of progressives, which is who I think they should be courting right now. At the same time, they are going to have to
actually find a way to get things done, and this almost always involves some sort of give
and take. And I don’t really know the answer; it’s
almost certainly going to depend on the context of each individual challenge. But what we have learned is that breeding
hatred and cynicism has real consequences for our politics and our country as a whole. In my opinion, the Republican Party has been
cultivating bigotry and party-over-country for decades, but their behavior during and
after the Obama administration has taken it to levels previously unheard of. And because of this, an incompetent, narcissistic,
proto-fascist liar has become the President. And since Trump voters and Republican voters
are generally one in the same, Republican leaders seem unwilling to make an attempt
to cage the beast they’ve released. So Democrats and progressives seem to have
a long road ahead in terms of combating the fury and scorn that currently defines our
politics. DAS JUS ME DOE. What do you think? Thanks for watching my video and thanks to
CuriosityStream for sponsoring this video. CuriosityStream is a subscription streaming
services that offers over 2,000 documentaries and nonfiction films, including many that
are exclusive originals. The content focuses on learning and exploring
topics such as science, nature, history, technology and more. In fact while making this video I wanted to
learn a little bit more about former Presidents who dealt with adversity so I watched PRESIDENTS
IN CRISIS, a short documentary only available on CuriosityStream. You can get unlimited access starting at just
$2.99 a month, but if you folks want to try it out, just sign up at curiositystream.com/t1j
and enter the promo code ‘t1j.’ during the signup process and when you do this you’ll
get your first 30 days for free. And remember by supporting sponsors like CuriosityStream,
you not only get access to a great service, but you also support me and my content allow
me to take my work to the next level. I also want to officially announce that I
have set up a Discord server for fans of my channel to hang out and chat. I’m hoping that it will be a pleasant alternative
to things like YouTube comments and Twitter threads which are hard to follow and can get
out of hand very quickly. I’m gonna be hanging out there all the time,
in fact Discord is probably going to be the easiest way to talk to me if you want to do
that. So go ahead and check it out, and I’ll see
you all in the next video. Bye.
