That’s all.
Maybe end up is the wrong word, but to have a smart and nuanced voice in the senate and leading committees as opposed to 50 shades of wealthy white men
But maybe he would’ve been a Corey Booker, fake hip, inauthentic, and in the pocket of Wall Street.

but alas

Obama would have been gotten rid of too.

Did Barack Obama have those?
No
Did Al Franken?
Yes

I knew Franken was being set-up once the story about how he squeezed a woman's waist as making him a sexual predator.

This was the level of accusations that got an elected Senator to resign. (and that he kissed a woman in a sketch where the script says he kisses a woman - or an pantomiming touching a woman's breast that were protected by a bullet proof vest.)

I'll tell you this - Franken not being on the panel during the Facebook question certainly helped Facebook out a lot.

They'd have gotten Obama too.
--

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/i-believe-frankens-accusers-because-he-groped-me-too/547691/

Then I saw Al Franken. I only bug celebrities for pictures when it’ll make my foster mom happy. She loves Franken, so I asked to get a picture with him. We posed for the shot. He immediately put his hand on my waist, grabbing a handful of flesh. I froze. Then he squeezed. At least twice.


(TINA DUPUY)
I’d been married for two years at the time; I don’t let my husband touch me like that in public because I believe it diminishes me as a professional woman. Al Franken’s familiarity was inappropriate and unwanted. It was also quick; he knew exactly what he was doing.

It shrunk me. It’s like I was no longer a person, only ornamental. It said, “You don’t matter—and I do.” He wanted to cop a feel and he demonstrated he didn’t need my permission.

And they wouldn’t have gotten senator Obama either.
Because if they had they would’ve.
Franken wasn’t innocent. You’re gonna have to learn to live with that.

wasn't for the other candidates issues

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/25/il.ryan/

this would be a great comparison

The amount of legislation that a senator can have a hand in over a six year term is absurd.
Add that on to committee oversight ...
I’m not sure what you’re getting at.

It’s my belief that Barack Obama 18-24 year senator would have been better for the American experiment of Democracy than Barack Obama 7.25 years of presidency overall.

In as such being a president is limited and being a former president is also limiting.

And that one of the more gifted politicians in recent history will be basically “the Beatles” instead of The Roots in terms of longevity and actual measure of talent vs noteriety and legacy

*ducks and runs for cover*

my theory is Obama wouldn't be able to influence congress and get something like Universal HC passed if he was in the Senate.

first band to have a cartoon in America

pretty much the first band to make a music video.

no snark but what impact has the Roots had as a group? First live hip hop band.

What else?

A front man who’s arguably the best at his craft ever (not John or George)
A bandleader who’s one of the largest continuous drivers of the culture as well as being a curator of the catalogs of greats (you think he’ll sell his masters?)
Kirk (better than any of them on the guitar)
Introduction of literature and philosophical topics that are digestible without LSD (thanks for “bringing” yogi culture to the forefront in the 60s, real tough there guys)

Music has continued to be advanced by The Roots and the members of the band
The Beatles peaked, flashed, and their actual impact is much lower than their commercial recognition.


Hell the contribution to the Soulaquarians’ careers should be more than enough

IMO their albums have declined over the years

BT is a beast, top 5 dead or alive... but not on these last few Roots albums.

and lets not act like Paul didn't continue to make music...

and who the hell is buying The Roots masters? For what? They aren't a commercial group.

and I really appreciate and love the Roots way more than the Beatles but nah.. this is a terrible hill to die on. They are the cover band on a TV Show. Not hating, just sayin'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMQRfliyznQ

nah b.

Which is my entire point.
The Roots have been better for longer with more impact to music than The Beatles were
Which is lightly akin to a term limited President vs a longer serving senator.

The haven’t dropped any albums that made folks stop and talk about them nationally.

You are basically saying anyone who stays together as a band for 20 years has impact. I don’t buy that argument.

Paul could do a show tomorrow and fill Wembley Stadium.

Obama can still have impact as a former President. He can raise shit loads of money, campaign for other politicians, his words still carry weight in the political forum, etc

I think you are selling those 8 years short.

..than The Beatles pretty ridiculous. Flattering, but ridiculous all the same.

Meanwhile, the roots (mainly quest and thought) have worked with, inspired, and cultivated near every part of black culture
Hell quest has a cookbook
From working with Dave at his block party
To cultivating and promoting newer and established artists with their festival
To being the literal soundtrack to a majority of black love movies
To working with nearly every rapper and “neo soul” artist you can name
If the two most prominent and longstanding members of the band are the most influential then I’m treating this as the influence of the band


Meanwhile the Beatles had a seven year run as a band
What artist came from them?
They were at best solid mimicers of established sound. Even their avant garden shot was bitten from someone else
At best they’re knock off Jay-Z’s in that they rose to the top promonice due to the deaths of larger and better artists, by riding the waves of the time, while never really innovating.
But Jay-Z has had a two decade run now.

Beatles run as a band
Denies the cultural influence of the roots versus the Beatles

Okay
Player

but that doesn't mean...lol

now more importance to OUR culture? sure..

and me spending time on this board being reasons.

"knock off Jay-Z"

you don't have to like them, but you're in here reaching for anything souding like the no-fun version of mistermaxxx

And that they didn’t stretch culture as much as adopted the latest waves Jay-Z style.

It feels as if you’re trying to make my words something they’re not.

LIST WAYS THE ROOTS HAVE IMPACTED CULTURE
lists ways which include a dab into foodie culture
THIS NIGGA LISTED A CULTURAL IMPACT

lol
Never change legs

but keep going

Cool on them being popular.

or read one of the 100 books written about them

or talked to the 1000 bands over the last 50 years that cite the beatles as an influence in some capacity

or read the billion articles all over the internet about their impact.

but.. if only Ringo wrote a cook book

have been ineffective.

I just don't see it as a lack of decent people willing to do bold things in Congress. I don't think there are individuals who can "save" government.

I think the system is so corrupt that it rewards certain types of bad characters and actors. Conversely, I think good people can't succeed in the current system. It's Ned Starks in Kings Landing.

For the system to change I think it's going to take outsiders willing to blow it up. A revolution of sorts.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

More measured, intelligent, and calculated politicking with belief in the system and low on cynicism.

We need to take money out of politics. Nothing short of a constitutional amendment would make that possible.

We need a radically new approach to healthcare. A public option is bold change.

Wouldn't you say our education system needs radical bold change?

Or how we address poverty?

Ending gerrymandering will require bold change.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

With limited time is what I meant.

And by "corrupt" I mean create a need to compromise his beliefs and the greater good in order to get things done?

Now imagine if he were a senator that needed to constantly fundraise and put local special interest before national interest?


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

.

A moderate, corporate Republican.

you don't live in the WH unless you have their approval



of course Trump is the exception but he came after a Black man named Barack Hussein Obama.

Because of how far rightward Bill Clinton dragged the party. Obama admitted as much himself.

"The truth of the matter is that my policies are so mainstream that if I had set the same policies that I had back in the 1980s, I would be considered a moderate Republican," he told Noticias Univision 23 in a White House interview.

And additionally they represent their constituents
Are N.J., NY, IL not beholden to corporate interests as states?
The granular varieties in Democratic representatives is what you’d find on a Congressional level. Your senators shouldn’t be that. They should rep their state.

Pro war, pro wall street, austerity at every turn and doing the absolute least possible and still get liberals to vote for you.

We’re a country that’s pro war
There needs to be people that are anti intervention until we’re not
But that’s who we are as a country
The defense system business model is too valuable to red states

We’re a country that’s pro predatory capitalism
There needs to be a way to put checks on that but it’s who we are a country

You can’t blame that on Democrats, fighting and consumerism are core to our national identity.
I personally disagree with it.
I personally feel that more investing in this country and the social net is the way to go.
I personally am not for the culture of America.

But as long as a country built and maintained by white supremacy is allowed to never confront that core driving force of their behaviors I don’t believe that systematic and radical change can take place. Because it can SO easily be derailed by just pointing at brown people. So we get incrementalism at best. Because in large part white society both red and blue, don’t want to fully admit that to get a better country we need to address structural inequality based on and fed with racism via white supremacy.

That's still true of modern Dems, Hillary and Obama included. Opinion polls and their actions confirm this.


>But that’s who we are as a country

Again, not true.


>The defense system business model is too valuable to red
>states

Not just red states. Blue states too. Hence long time Dem hawks like Feinstein in a very Blue, very peace loving state like Cali.


>We’re a country that’s pro predatory capitalism

Again, not true. The people realize the system doesn't work for them and have wanted something different FOR DECADES. It's the people in DC who don't want it to change.


>You can’t blame that on Democrats, fighting and consumerism
>are core to our national identity.

Again, that's bullshit. Those things feel like part of our national ID because Ds & Rs have been telling you that for decades.

Warrants.

And not what we're told. The left has been overwhelmingly in favor of single payer for years, meanwhile the Dem nominee stands up and tells you why that's a pie in the sky idea that's never gonna happen. Wash, rinse, repeat.

.

6 yrs while he had the majority


a single senator for 30 yrs is way less powerful than a president in 4-8


senator obama getting outvoted on every bill that the gop pushes thru is not helping anybody

If that bit of obstruction isn't power, I don't know what is.

If anything, the Dems should've cliqued up over that in every way possible because that was an obvious overreach by Mitch and the GOP.


---------------------------------------


---------------------------------------

so how could he make big loves as a senator?

Obama was always trying to reach across the aisle instead of letting his nuts hang.

Obama couldn't just let your nuts hang because he was the first black President. He didn't want to be the last.

The next black President though.........that'll be another story.


---------------------------------------


---------------------------------------

Governance than simply politicking and grandstanding.
His respect for the institutions is what limited him as a president, but respect for the institutions is legitimately what we need from nearly every person serving.

Other than just having a black face present.

The junior senator from Oregon is a good example of what I’m wanting in a Senator.
I could name off a number of Senators there for politicking. I can name very few interested in governance. Barack Obama for most accounts was interested in governance.

I mean, what do you consider a "smart" "nuanced" voice in this context?
What would this voice say? What would those words accomplish?
What has Obama said or done that makes him the person who fits this description?

If you have no answers, that's fine, but the reasoning you pointed to is vague and even subjective.

You wanna challenge it? Great, develop your own and work through that