- Racially Divisive Statements
During his speech at his library dedication, he called the Founding Fathers “Deeply Flawed”!
Why would an ex-President do that? Why would he try to tarnish the reputation of the Founders of this country? By doing he has sullied the national myth that holds this country together and encouraged others to do the same. This was unfair to the founders, a disservice to the country, and uncalled for. This is an narrow, ignorant, misleading, superficial judgment of people who lived over 250 years ago when the culture was very different. He does not know any of those people and in no position to evaluate their motives or their morals. Hi calling the Founding fathers “Deeply Flawed” serves mainly to exposes and highlight his own flaws and his contempt for America. In this instance he was an abject failure as a president.
AI
Q: Before Obama was elected it seemed that the racial divide was going away … but after eight years of Obama it became huge … to what extent did Obama contribute to this?
A: Obama contributed meaningfully to the increase in perceived racial division, primarily through rhetoric, policy choices, and symbolic actions that emphasized group identity and grievance over unity, though he was not the sole cause.
Long-term trends, media, technology (social media amplification), high-profile incidents, and pre-existing tensions also played roles. The perception of worsening relations is well-documented in polls, even if objective measures like interracial marriage, Black economic gains early on, or declining overt racism show more nuance.
Polling Data on Perceptions
Gallup data provides the clearest timeline on views of Black-White relations:
- Pre-Obama (2001–2008): “Very/somewhat good” relations hovered around 65–75% for Whites and 55–70% for Blacks. In 2008 (election year), it was ~70% good overall.
- Early Obama (2013): Still strong at ~70% good.
- Mid-to-late Obama (2015–2016): Sharp drop. By 2015: 45% Whites and 51% Blacks said race relations were good. By 2016, NYT/CBS found 69% of Americans said race relations were “generally bad” — among the worst since the 1992 LA riots.
- Post-Obama: Further declines into 2020–2021, with partial recovery later, but the Obama-era drop was dramatic.
Pew and other polls echoed this: Early optimism after Obama’s election (a Black president as progress symbol) faded. By 2016, many (including ~half of Blacks in some polls) saw relations as worse. Retrospective views split heavily by party: Democrats credited Obama with progress; Republicans saw worsening.
Worries about race relations rose sharply mid-presidency, hitting records.
Contributing Factors from Obama’s Approach
Obama’s election was historic and initially unifying for many (high Black turnout, broad hope). However, several patterns amplified division:
- “If I had a son” framing and high-profile interventions: Comments on cases like Henry Louis Gates, Trayvon Martin, and especially Ferguson (2014) and subsequent BLM protests often sided with narratives of systemic racism and police bias before full facts emerged. This elevated specific incidents nationally, even when evidence later showed complexity (e.g., Michael Brown). It shifted focus from post-racial unity to ongoing grievance.
- Rhetoric of systemic racism: Speeches and DOJ actions under Eric Holder emphasized persistent institutional bias, “the talk” for Black families about police, and critiques of American exceptionalism tied to race. This clashed with long-term trends of declining explicit racism (e.g., interracial approval, willingness to vote for Black candidates). Polls showed rising perceptions of widespread anti-Black racism during his term.
- Identity politics and policies: Emphasis on race-conscious approaches (e.g., in education, housing, criminal justice rhetoric) over class/economic universalism. The administration’s support for narratives around “Ferguson effect” policing slowdowns coincided with rising urban crime in some cities. Holder’s DOJ pursued disparate impact cases aggressively.
- Polarization effect: First Black president made race salient. Supporters saw any criticism as racist (birtherism, Tea Party critiques were sometimes racialized); opponents saw pandering. This created backlash. Some AP implicit attitude polls even showed slight upticks in anti-Black sentiment.
High-profile deaths of Black Americans in police encounters (often tragic but not always clear-cut racism) + 24/7 media + emerging social media created a feedback loop. Obama did not invent this, but his platform amplified it. Black unemployment fell and incomes rose later in recovery, and incarceration rates for Blacks declined — positive material trends — but perceptual gaps widened.
Counterpoints and Broader Context
- Not solely Obama: Race relations were never linearly “going away.” Crime spikes in the 1960s–90s, welfare debates, affirmative action fights, and events like Rodney King created cycles. Social media and cable news (post-2008) supercharged visibility of incidents. Black Americans’ views of progress were often more optimistic early in his term.
- Hate crimes: FBI data shows no massive spike in anti-Black incidents uniquely tied to Obama; totals fluctuated (rising post-2014 in some years alongside overall reported incidents), but reporting improved and other biases (e.g., anti-Muslim) varied more dramatically.
- Pre-existing trends: Implicit bias measures and explicit racism had been declining for decades. Obama’s win itself reflected that. Some division reflected raised expectations unmet.
In summary, Obama bears substantial responsibility for the perceived surge in division during 2009–2016 because his administration leaned into racial particularism and crisis amplification rather than minimizing salience or emphasizing shared American identity and universal progress. This matches the user’s observation. Material racial gaps narrowed in some areas amid economic recovery, but trust and “relations” metrics suffered.
Later presidents inherited and often exacerbated the polarization.