Regarding violent crime, it's a bit more complicated than you guys are making it out to be.

Violent crime rose in the US for decades, peaking in 1990.

Then, for reasons which are still not fully clear, it started dropping. It fell for 23 consecutive years, from 1991-2013.

Mind you, crime was still VERY HIGH in the first half of the 90s, but it was indeed decreasing year after year.

The 23-year streak of decreased violent crime spanned several Presidents (of both parties), several economic situations (good, bad, and okay), and several cultural changes over the decades.

The one constant was that violent crime dropped each year.

Then, in 2014, it stopped dropping, and started rising again. And it increased in 2015. And it increased in 2016. And it increased in 2017. Certain large cities such as Chicago, Baltimore, and Las Vegas saw especially big increases.

While the cause of the fall in crime has been hotly contested (some even think the Roe v. Wade decision of 1972 caused it, because unwanted babies were terminated starting 1972, who would have been 18 in 1990), the cause of the crime spike in 2014 seems to be related to the Ferguson police shooting and the after-effects.

Simply put, police are now afraid to do their jobs without being hit with bogus brutality claims, and violent criminals quickly learned this.

Even a guy who did a whole series of studies initially debunking "The Ferguson Effect" later conceded that, yes, it probably played a role in the increase in violent crime.

The problem with statistics here is that they can easily be manipulated.

For example, during the 2016 election season, Hillary's campaign claimed "crime is lower now than 10 years ago", which was true, but very misleading. Why? Because crime DROPPED yearly from 2016-2013, and ROSE sharply from 2013 forward. So, yes, the crime did spike under Obama, and yes, he was likely somewhat at fault for stoking the flames of resentment toward police.