Depends on your definition of "suffering"

An acquaintance of mine posted this screed on FB:  "8 years of suffering under Barack Obama"

It starts out fairly innocous:

The sentence I hear most from well-meaning, conservative friends since President Trump’s election is this: “We suffered 8 years under Barack Obama.”
Fair enough. Let’s take a look.

I won't address each point, but I will dissect the obvious ones:

General Motors and Chrysler were on the brink of bankruptcy, with Ford not far behind, and their failure, along with their supply chains, would have meant the loss of millions of jobs. Obama pushed through a controversial, $8o billion bailout to save the car industry. The U.S. car industry survived, started making money again, and the entire $80 billion was paid back, with interest.

And what made the bailout controversial?  Was it that it circumvented bankruptcy laws, and in so doing, violated centuries of contract law?  Obama insinuated the federal government into what should have been a cut-and-dried bankruptcy process:  GM files for bankruptcy, and a court rules GM's creditors be paid off.  This link tells it better than I could, but in short:  With bankruptcy, the secured bond holders would have the best chance of getting the most back on their investment in the company paid off first.  The UAW, with their pension fund (an unsecured creditor), was less deserving.  Instead, the Obama administration screwed over the secured bond holders into accepting 29 cents on the dollar, versus the UAW getting 40 cents on the dollar.

While we remain vulnerable to lone-wolf attacks, no foreign terrorist organization has successfully executed a mass attack here since 9/11.

This requires a liberal reading of "lone-wolf":  Nidal Hassan, who shot up Fort Hood, was in contact with al-Awlaki.  The administration classified the shooting as "workplace violence" instead of terrorism, despite Hassan's identifying himself as a "Soldier of Allah".  Hassan's attack was motivated by radical Islam.

Obama ordered the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden.

He only had to violate the airspace of another nation to do so.  Granted, Pakistan is hardly a reliable ally in the war against terrorism, but they weren't declared state sponsors of terror.  So to violate their airspace was an example of the leftist mindset of ends justifying means.

For all the inadequacies of the Affordable Care Act, we seem to have forgotten that, before the ACA, you could be denied coverage for a pre-existing condition and kids could not stay on their parents’ policies up to age 26.
 

It blows my mind how many people don't comprehend how the notion of catastrophic insurance works.  There's a pool of money, paid into from premiums by all the customers of the insurance company.  If you have a pre-existing condition, it means you are more likely to need access to that pool of money.  In some cases, it's guaranteed to draw money out of the pool.  If I, as a healthy person, am less likely to need access to the pool of money should my health suddenly change, shouldn't I pay less than someone who is a greater risk to depleting the pool of money for others who might need it?  And is there a point to "insuring" someone who is a guaranteed risk?  And how the hell is a 26-year-old a kid?  If we recognize 18 as the age of an adult, and you're no longer allowed to claim a person 18 and older as a dependent on your taxes, how is it logical that they are still a health-insurance dependent?  It makes for messy law.

Obama approved a $14.5 billion system to rebuild the levees in New Orleans.

After the city of New Orleans squandered millions in funds in the years before and after Katrina.

He expanded funding for embryonic stem cell research, supporting groundbreaking advancement in areas like spinal injury treatment and cancer.

This was a reversal of the Bush policy to not fund federal funds for the pie-in-the-sky promises of embryonic stem cell research, as a nod to the moral implications of research on otherwise viable embryos.  Obama made federal funds available before there was any tangible proof of the benefits.  That's not surprising, considering his administration's willingness to direct taxpayer dollars to projects that never stood a chance of convincing private investors to fund them, and for good reason.

He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

For doing nothing!  He'd been in office for weeks.  The award was seen as a snub of Bush, and Obama proceeded to show he was not deserving of a "peace" prize with ordering unilateral military action around the globe.  Lest we forget he committed the U.S. military to actions in Libya, never even providing the courtesy to provide advance notification to Congress, something I recall Chuck Schumer being bothered by, and mentioning that Obama's predecessors had done.

He was the first president since Eisenhower to serve two terms without personal or political scandal.

Operation Fast and Furious, which arguably resulted in Border Patrol officer Brian Terry's death?  The IRS denying or slow-rolling 501c3 organizations with a conservative political affiliation, versus "progressive" organizations not encountering similar resistance?  The attempt to freeze Fox News Channel out of the press pool, an action that prompted their rivals to object to?  How about the dubious investments in "green" energy companies like Solyndra that resulted in the waste of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.  And let us not forget that the whole "separation" of children from their illegal immigrant "parents" was a program started and enforced under Obama.

You can claim his administration was scandal-free, only if you severely limit your diet of news coverage or suffer from a faulty memory.