The list of things that distinguish former President Obama from the man who succeeded him in the White House could stretch all the way to the moon and back. We were reminded of one of those profound distinctions today.
Obama had a desire to understand and empathize with the people opposed to him. Some of this surely came from growing up in a mixed-race family and observing how even people he cared for, sometimes gave in to base fears.
His response was to try to find common ground, and he did this almost to a fault, effortlessly rationalizing their arguments, looking for the common humanity and the best in everyone. As a matter of political effectiveness, this is an amazing ability to have. For example, we can point to his friendship with Tom Coburn (R-OK).
Here’s another example from earlier today in Berlin, Germany:
"Immigration issues are driving a lot of the political turmoil here in Europe and in my own country," Obama said in a shared video of the talk. Urging those in the crowd to view those who expressed opposition to immigration with empathy, Obama said: "We can't label everyone who is disturbed by migration as racist.
"If you're going to have a coherent, cohesive society, then everybody has to have some agreed-upon rules. And there are going to have to be some accommodations that everybody makes. And that includes the people who are newcomers. The question is, are those fair?" Obama said.
"Should we want to encourage newcomers to learn the language of the country that they're moving to? Of course," he continued. "Does that mean that they can never use their own language? No, of course it doesn't mean that, but it's not racist to say, 'Ah, if you're going to be here then you should learn the language of the country that you just arrived at because we need to have some sort of common language in which all of us can work, and learn and understand each other. — www.newsweek.com/...
I don’t know exactly what accommodations Obama is thinking of here, and whether a requirement to “learn the language of the country” makes sense in the US which has no national language. I doubt he believes we should entertain any of the clearly dehumanizing rhetoric this White House has engaged in. I do, however, agree with his advice that calling voters names is probably not a sensible thing, or one conducive to electoral success.
We need a robust, uncompromising vision of the future to generate enthusiasm among voters and win in 2020. That does not, however, mean we need to engage in calling voters names. That is an own goal we should avoid, as Obama says. Nor should we rely purely on people recognizing how dastardly Trump is. We need to make a positive case for how we will improve the lives of all American voters. We can leave the name-calling to Trump.
— @subirgrewal