Democrats Are Frustrated with Obama’s Lasting Grip on the Party
The Democratic Party is at a crossroads, with many members growing increasingly frustrated by the persistent influence of Barack Obama’s inner circle. Since Obama’s presidency ended in 2017, his former advisors and strategists—figures like David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett—have maintained significant control over the party’s direction, shaping its candidates, messaging, and priorities. While Obama’s time in office was a defining period for Democrats, a growing number argue that the continued dominance of his loyalists is stifling new ideas and alienating key segments of the party’s base. This tension is forcing a debate about who will chart the Democratic Party’s future in 2025 and beyond.
Obama’s presidency brought policies like the Affordable Care Act, but it also left the party wrestling with internal divisions and electoral challenges. His advisors, often dubbed the “Obama people,” have held sway through roles in the Democratic National Committee (DNC), consulting firms, and media. Critics within the party argue that this group pushes cautious, centrist candidates over bolder voices like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Bernie Sanders. The 2024 primaries, where establishment figures were heavily favored, fueled accusations that the DNC is clinging to an outdated strategy, prioritizing electability over the transformative change many voters seek.
Progressives, in particular, are vocal about their discontent. They argue that the party has failed to fully embrace policies like Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, or broad student debt relief, blaming the influence of Obama-era operatives for this reluctance. The DNC’s leadership is often criticized for sidelining grassroots momentum in favor of corporate-friendly, incremental approaches. On platforms like X, users have expressed their frustration, with one post declaring the party “run by Obama’s old guard, not the people.” This reflects a broader sentiment that the leadership is out of step with the urgency and ambition of younger, more diverse voters.
The issue extends beyond policy to questions of representation. Many Democrats feel the party’s leadership fails to reflect its base, particularly the growing influence of Latino, Black, and young voters who lean further left. The Obama circle, while diverse in some respects, is often seen as elitist, more tied to corporate networks and media roles than to the working-class communities that drive the party’s vote. This disconnect has sparked resentment, with critics arguing that the DNC prioritizes insiders over the broader coalition needed for electoral success and meaningful change.
Calls for new leadership are gaining traction, with figures like Pramila Jayapal and Ro Khanna emerging as voices for a more populist, inclusive party. Grassroots movements, amplified on X, are demanding a shift away from the top-down control of Obama’s allies. One X user captured the mood, stating, “The Obama era is done. We need leaders who understand 2025, not 2015.” These demands highlight a desire for a party that reflects current economic challenges, cultural shifts, and urgent issues like climate change and racial justice.
With the 2026 midterms and 2028 presidential race on the horizon, the Democratic Party faces a pivotal moment. Can it break free from the shadow of Obama’s legacy and embrace a new vision, or will it remain tethered to past strategies? The unrest within the party signals a hunger for change, but bridging the divide between its establishment and its base will be a challenge. For now, the frustration is evident: Democrats want a party that looks forward, not one anchored to the past. Whether the DNC can loosen the grip of Obama’s inner circle remains an open question.
