Is anyone else excited by Obama's post-election soon to be initiatives?

[LAS14]

I've been scouring DU for causes to rally behind in this post-election desert. Not surprisingly I've found most signs of home coming from President Obama. I'm so glad he's going to continue to be a force! The three things below are EXACTLY the kinds of things I've been thinking about. Great minds...

Here are the 3 I know about.

I.
http://www.npr.org/2016/12/19/505549311/to-rehabilitate-democratic-party-obama-plans-to-coach-young-talent

To Rehabilitate Democratic Party, Obama Plans To 'Coach' Young Talent

www.npr.org

The president said Democrats have "ceded too much territory" to Republicans in local races. Obama sees his role after leaving office as a "coach" for young talent in the party.

II.
I'm still hoping to rev up some excitement for this as well. It's like the first but focuses on geography more than age.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028372441

III.
The first bright message I heard was that he was interested in looking into gerrymandering, but I don't have a link for that.

[shraby]

1. He's a day late and a dollar short on the gerrymandering.

It should have been and wasn't and should now be done by the census bureau or an independent non political citizens group that redistricts the full country.

[MineralMan]

5. The President has no role in preventing gerrymandering.

District definitions are drawn by each state. There is an oversight by the federal government, but changes require legal action in federal courts. Redistricting after each census is still done by states, with the federal government playing no role until after the districts are defined, except in rare cases where a court has decided that redistricting will be reviewed by a federal system.

The President, however, plays no role in this and has no power to play a role.

If your state has gerrymandered districts, then it's up to the voters in your state to elect new representation that will do the job fairly, as is done in most states. If you need an example, look at Minnesota or Oregon. MN's districting system is subject to state court review after each redistricting. It must follow strict rules and adhere to state law. The citizens of Minnesota have insisted on that.

Each state needs a fair redistricting system, but it's up to the citizens of each state to make sure that is in place.

You can review methods of redistricting and learn more about gerrymandering at the links below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States

[shraby]

6. I realize that, but he could speak out that the rules need changed. Also the extreme

gerrymandering could have been challenged in courts.

[MineralMan]

7. He has, and there have been court cases already.

See this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States

The problem is that states have powers, too, that are independent of federal government, and states' rights are a serious thing in a number of states, which seek to retain them. The courts, too, recognize the rights of states to govern their own elections, and hesitate to impose rules. Essentially, courts can act only if unfair district have already been created.

[LAS14]

8. He's talking about acting as a private citizen. Not before the inauguration.

[MineralMan]

11. Yes. I realize that. I was addressing

a claim that he had not done enough while in office. I hope his efforts as an ex-President will be fruitful.

[treestar]

2. Yes. I am behind whatever he does.

And doesn't do, as he has no duties after 1/20 and can retire as he has a right to, but he'd be bored and he can't help but serve this country as that is how he is. Can't wait for the first post blaming him for not doing enough as former POTUS.

[Turbineguy]

3. The first thing he needs to do

is to let Trump and the GOP fuck things up but good.

Allow the opposition to do your work for you.

[brooklynite]

4. No, because this should have been launched years ago.

[LAS14]

9. By that reasoning we cede the whole future to the forces of evil!

[hollowdweller]

10. No I'm not really excited

In 2008 we had reached the point where nearly 30 years of using conservative ideas had brought us.

Destruction of the surplus due to the Bush Tax Cuts.

2 wars and the biggest domestic terrorist attack we had ever had.

Economic collapse due to the misdeeds of the rich

Erosion of the middle class.

Obama could have used the bully pulpit and his significant rhetorical powers to permanently discredit hawkish foreign policy and trickle down economic theory and deregulation.

He could have done the same thing as Reagan did to the democrats in the 80's.

When the GOP sensed he wasn't going to do that and went on the attack he decried partisanship but for nearly his whole first term he made out like it was both parties.

I'll be happy for anything he can do to help but we don't need a peacemaker and negotiator. We need a knife fighter.

As long as the GOP perceives the Dems as weak they will do whatever they want to destroy democracy and favor the wealthy.

I just don't see Obama as the one to lead the charge. He doesn't want to get his hands dirty.

[Locrian]

12. I agree - it's time for him to get out of the way n/t

[LAS14]

13. K & R

[Tommy_Carcetti]

14. I'd be more excited if a lunatic hadn't just been elected. nt

[LAS14]

15. Kicking one last time in hopes of getting more opinions from the evening crowd.