President Barack Obama answers questions about the Iran nuclear deal during a news conference in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Wednesday, July 15, 2015. The president vigorously defended the nuclear deal with Iran, casting the historic accord as the only possibility to avert a nuclear arms race in the Middle East and reduce the chances of war. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Outgoing US President Barack Obama has claimed he would have won the elections if he was able to contend again.

“I am confident in this vision because I’m confident that if I — if I had run again and articulated it, I think I could’ve mobilized a majority of the American people to rally behind it,” Obama said in an interview posted on the podcast “The Axe Files” on Monday, produced by CNN and the University of Chicago.

“I know that in conversations that I’ve had with people around the country, even some people who disagreed with me, they would say the vision, the direction that you point towards is the right one,” he added.

Advertisement

“Losing’s never fun,” Obama said, speaking philosophically.

“I’m proud that I have tried to conduct myself in office to do what I think is right rather than what is popular, I always tell people don’t underestimate the public humiliation of losing in politics,” he added.

“It’s unlike what most people experience as adults, this sense of rejection,” he stated.

Share this article:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
ALSO READ  Russia’s new high-speed military helicopter to make maiden flight by 2025
 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

Notice: All comments represent the view of the commenter and not necessarily the views of AMN.

All comments that are not spam or wholly inappropriate are approved, we do not sort out opinions or points of view that are different from ours.

If your comment is held for moderation, please just be patient, it will be published unless it falls into one of the two categories as mentioned above.

27 COMMENTS

    • Of course you’d support the socialist. Socialism has and will never work!! Spending more than you have just creates debt until the nation buckles, happens with every socialist state!

      • Sanders ain’t a socialist. Just the less evil of those pro-capitalism who were running for POTUS.
        I’m not at all for socialism. Socialism can be seen as a step forward but will NEVER be enough.
        Funny fact, US are in ultra-liberalism (which is so very near fascism as the definition of fascism is capitalism pushed to the extreme) and have more debt than ANY other country on Earth. You’ll have to explain me why Sanders considers the example of i.e. Sweden that has one of the healthiest economies you can find…
        Thus, I actually favour NONE of the political parties you may find in ANY election as even the more hardcore leftist running for power ain’t enough leftist for me or, well, by really thinking about it, people like us should be, due to our aims, should be called “abovists” as what we want is really above all these stuck to Earth low ideologies.
        Let’s be clear, what’s targetted is an abundance and recreation society for all. Today, this planet’s a paradise but just for what? 30M ppl? Maybe even less. Let’s make her a paradise for all and, BTW, I’m considerating much more than this planet as my way of thinking the “economy” is at the solar system level so it’s really “above” all the crap you have in mind about economy and politics as, to be frank, leaders need us, we don’t need leaders.
        Well, one of us wrote a very popular TV-serie then motion-feature movies, he also helped a lot in the fight against racism and all was made in a very subtle way but yeah, it’s definitively what we all look for. In one of the movies, the main character is asked about the economy of the system he came from. I engage you to listen to his answer. This movie is “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home”

        • He is, he proposed spending multiple trillions over the course of 5 years that he didn’t have, which would’ve plunged the nation into further debt, causing them to eventually buckle, that’s textbook socialism. Sweden isn’t socialist, it’s capitalist with some socialist policies. Scandinavia as a whole tried socialism in the 70s, and their economies were so badly wrecked that they reverted back to capitalism before they collapsed completely. Much of the damage from back then is yet to be fixed.

          But I’m not surprised that a leftie is ignorant about facts, it’s an unfortunate trend. Socialism entails entertaining fantasies, ones that can never realistically happen, as Start Trek is proof of; it never explained how Earth became a utopia because it would be an impossibility; it was just another left wing dream that will never come true.

          • Same goals for Sanders as he patterned highly on Swede model.
            You may not know the Star Trek universe as it perfectly explains how the world went out of capitalism. Thus, when did it began? Before it, there was already no economy, it didn’t prevented humanity to exist for what? near a hundred thousand years? Was there any political party? Centralized state? Nope. Now, komrads during the Spanish war suppressed money… In one year, the doubled agricultural production and quadrupled the industrial production. What stopped the experience? Right wingers, socialist, fascists and commies teamed together to destroy us… This simply proves two things : it’s “economically” viable and those who want to keep money to have power among the people to use them indefinitely as slaves, even if disguised ways, fucking don’t want anything like this to happen. I make no difference between fascists, classic right-wing, social-democracy, socialists or commies : you’re all the same! You even use lies upon us : as soon as there is chaos, all of yours say it’s anarchy while you made this chaos and the definition of anarchy is exactly the contrary of chaos : it’s a very organised society, it’s order without the power, moreover, you very often vote as one of the basis is direct democracy and now, there are technical means that even would allow to vote 10 times a day or more.
            Add to this, we need serious space capacity to launch the mineral exploitation of solar system. As long we don’t get rid of monetary system, this will be impossible. 80 if not 85% of the economical crap is only made to make the money flow while only production (including energy) and distribution are needed with planning. If all this workforce is moved into technology production and these now impossible assets to pay for are made possible as they are free, let’s rock. Nonetheless, the actual high automation of production has already very reduced the manpower needed : just think about it : 1 century ago, we had 70% in agriculture. Now we’re under 1% and we’re still the 1st agriculture in the EU and even end throwing lotsa food to trashbin due to overproduction. Huge unemployment is simply due to high automation. Actually, we could even increase production by beginning to work for only 2 days a week! Nowadays, even cars/trucks can get rid of drivers and planes can fly without pilot! Postal system is automatised, etc etc…
            People like you are stuck in a totally outdated limited viewing about politics, economy and all this shit and are actually responsible for wars and also teaming with backwardist forces like wahhabists/salafists, even if you don’t know it as your system foundations are in serious jeopardy. What makes socialism fucked is that they try to reform capitalism and/or replace it what is nothing else than state capitalism while it simply should be terminated with the monetary system.

          • We had never a true capitalisme system in Europe.
            May France and England in the 19 century, but it is an old story.

          • Hopefully, although UK has always been more hardcore capitalist, thus, as soon as the empire was gone, UK began to collapse and soon is likely to not exist anymore. Thus, Maggie and some of her allies have drived the EU too much on crappy privatisation path and well, richs are now richers, poors are poorer and the middle class is getting poor so let’s be clear : ultra liberalism SUCKS! Everything worked much better when states were holding all public services and strategic assets as the state is here to work for the people, not for the bourgeoisie!

          • I agrre fully with you. 100%, and if 200% would be possible … 🙂

          • This is the definition of fascism by its inventor, Benito Mussolini! Nothing French in it!
            X-finger it won’t happen here : Pétain was a catastrophe and not even speaking of his friends Benito and Adolf.
            High time we solve the FN problem. Nobody dared to forbid this party, it’s considered impossible but hey, Impossible : not French 😉

          • Why do you hate the FN? They’re anti-EU, anti-Islam, they’re a bit left like you, I have no idea why you hate them so much, considering that their biggest policies look to solve France’s greatest problems, ones perpetuated by your other political parties.

        • Capitalism is freedom for richs, all others being slaves… Not better!
          Fuck all that we’ve got to get on with!
          Now what you see as socialism might be the USSR, well, this wasn’t socialism or communism but the Canada-Dry of it and as all know, Canada-Dry looks like alcohol, tastes like alcohol but isn’t alcohol!
          As soon as Stalin came into power, all hope was lost! It’d had been exactly the same if Jesse James had became POTUS! Well, US weren’t far with Killary, hehe!

  8. Now wait the SyriaGate is investigated : it’s gonna fucking butt-hurt!
    Just think about it : this is how US taxpayers money went to al-Qaeda gangs on the US terror list… Well, we also can call it the AfghanGate, the IraqGate, the LibyaGate, the 911Gate, the WTC-Gate or why not, as it’s very extended, the QaedaGate?
    We’re far from only, as Kit says, “frustration with the establishment”, this is just a case of high treason and a bipartisan one…
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0ozQLeWgAQAaZp.jpg
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0ozQMmXUAAkUbq.jpg
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0ozQLdWgAAJmMG.jpg
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0ozQLlXEAAEVdN.jpg
    Now, let’s see if Trump has the balls to really drain the swamp and BTW, let’s see if he pushes the Tulsi Gabbard law voted : this would greatly help, same thing for JASTA which was passed despite of Obama’s veto…
    Actually, it’s not only in the US that many people have good reasons to be furious about him but also on many others : Clintons’, al-Sauds’, al-Thanis’, Kerry, Bushs’, Rumsfeld, Cheney (AKA Darth Vader), Wolfowitz, Albright, Blair, Cameron, the infamous Kissinger, etc etc etc…
    ICP should be relocated to Nuremberg just for ’em.

  12. Well he’d have a better chance than Hillary. It’s not like he had a crooked past like her. This helped Trump, alongside promising to “bring back jobs”, as well as change foreign policy. Something Hillary dared not touch.