I disagree. Ground game wasn't as big a factor as has been heavily touted. If the GOP successfully re-brands itself for Latinos, women, LGBT people, and non-evangelicals, they can win the 2016 election based on TV ads/"flash". The margin of error was not as great when seeing on a county/state level. Social issues and anti-intellectualism spurned many away. Rather than more William F. Buckleys, I see too many gun-toting, bible-thumping, trailer trash, mouth breathers in the party. It doesn't help when people see little ethnic and racial diversity either. The Republicans can be competitive if they reject backward social ideas and recognize how massive income and wealth disparity are hurting the middle class and the country. By keeping the corporate-state in check, and focusing on keeping taxes lower and government smaller than Democrats, they can be very viable. On climate change or health care reform, Obama's party runs on what used to be conservative ideas. If they return to the Rockefeller/Goldwater-era party, many voters including me may easily switch sides for 2016/2020 and vote Republican.
Why on Earth do you say that? I voted Obama certainly but I really find that to be over the top. I also find the mystique behind Reagan and Clinton to be mostly bull****. Reagan is the guy who started this race to the bottom with deficits and trickle down. Clinton was just damn lucky that the internet was born during his watch, hell he oversaw NAFTA which in retrospect was the door opening to this free trade bull**** that has caused the outsourcing of middle class jobs and an acceleration of the race to the bottom. Obama passed health care but it's still not a single payer which is what we really need in this country. And we can talk about Bush screwing up the economy but unemployment is still nearly 8% after 4 years. I believe there is a fundamental shift that has happened in this country with respect to jobs and the economy and it's not being addressed. And I know that Republicans have fillibustered the hell out of Obama but he has been ineffective in making that case. Obama has also continued Bush policies concerning secret government which is horrifying. Bush opened Pandora's box after 9/11 and Obama is now complicit in those policies. The possible use of drones over US territory on American citizens seems to be the next step and that is unacceptable. Privacy is being destroyed bit by bit and Obama is as responsible for that as anyone now. I don't think anyone is going to look back and think of Obama as this FDR figure. I think people will look at the last 30 years including Obama as a time when we squandered an opportunity to do great things in the world and instead focused on corporate greed and a might makes right philosophy of foreign policy.
At the federal level, superpacs were a pretty huge failure. At the local level, they were extraordinarily successful. Arkansas finally lost its Democratic majority in the legislature that has been around since the end of Reconstruction. And Republicans made huge gains in the West Virginia legislature. Both of those states were the last two southern states where the Democratic Party still have control over state government. Many of those victories were fueled by Super Pac adds.
I don't know about that, but I think he will have passed the 2nd biggest landmark legislation since FDR. I think with Civil Rights, Medicare, SS LBJ is 2nd.
You can malign Reagan and Clinton.... but there is a very high opinion of them with most Americans and it is reflected in how often they are used by both parties. Concerning Obama, he is a bit of a unique case in that he is the first non white male President, which is an enormous accomplishment. Further, his speechs are very idealistic and as such will resonate in 50 to 100 years. As far as how people feel right now about Obama, remember, many people did not have a high opinion of Lincoln when he was President, nor did they of Harry Truman or other Presidents. Time tends to soften the political controversies. The passing of healthcare reform, his stance of gay rights and possible immigration reform all will be viewed as positives 50-100 years from now. Further, as the American population and demographics change, Obama and what he is and represents will become more important. I am not saying Obama is as good a President as Clinton..... just like Truman was not as good a President as Woodrow Wilson .... but some are just icons.
The ground game is over rated at a national level, but not at the state level. Because of the electoral college, it is HUGE in the swing states. Obama does not win Florida or Ohio without the ground game.
Well I agree that he'll be remembered for what he represents, definitely. These Presidents, Reagan and Clinton, were responsible for incredibly bad things that are only revealed in time. This pushing for these two as great Presidents is cheerleading more than anything, I don't think the case has real substance behind it.
