"BIll Clinton saved the Democratic party"

[burythehatchet]

No, he didn't. He SOLD it. But it wasn't his to sell.

[RevCheesehead]

1. He also brought great embarassment to it.

:hide:

[cloud75]

6. there were more positives that negatives and he had to deal with a

republican majority in congress so he couldn't pass all the legislation we would have wanted but there was a lot of progress during his time...yes there was an embarrassing time but he is human and we all make mistakes...it was a personal mistake nobody died during his time in office.

[NJSecularist]

2. He's the only Democrat to be elected as president in the last 28 years

He saved the Democratic Party.

[Alexander]

3. He's the only Democrat to have lost Congress in the last 62 years

Gee, thanks for saving us, Bill.

[IADEMO2004]

10. Clinton won when the MSM was full of House Post Office and Bank scandals

In 93 House dems were convicted of felonies and in 94 Gingrich had his little code word book to use against Dems.

[Alexander]

13. Don't Ask Don't Tell and the Brady Bill sure didn't help that, either.

It's like he couldn't hesitate to lose Congress for us, even before his inauguration, with the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" nonsense.

Hmm....

[burythehatchet]

4. Only the name remained the same. The philosophy of being the voice

of labor and the downtrodden was discarded. But I understand where you're coming from. I think you believe that party is importrant to get into power and then we can worry about the country. But compromising ones principles is forever.

[NJSecularist]

5. There are complaints that you can level at Bill

As you said, certain philosophies he discarded, but give the man credit, he is the only Democrat to get elected in the last 28 years. The presidency is the most powerful position in the country. He did something that Kerry, Gore, Dukakis and Mondale couldn't do.

[burythehatchet]

8. the problem is once the party has been sold, you can't get a refund.

The reason Gore Duk and Mondale lost is that wouldn't sell the party out entirely. They still thought they could sell just a little and work for decent causes simulatneously. But they were wrong. So I give him credit for getting elected, but the cost was too high. He sold the cow and now we have to buy our milk from THEIR cow. The left is powerless, and that's why HRC will not win the GE, they have lost a majority of the left.

[NJSecularist]

9. That's bull

Before you say the left is powerless, why don't you wait until this election s over?

Have you seen the turnout in the primaries and caucuses so far? Powerless my ass.

[burythehatchet]

12. The LEFT is powerless, the Democratic party is no longer representative of the left

hence we are powerless. I value my liberal credentials a heckuva lot more than my Democratic credentials.

[dajoki]

84. It is no longer our grandparents Democratic Party...

I do remember what our party was like way back when, I can't remember the point when it was "sold out", but I think it was a gradual decline. We are going to need an FDR or RFK to have any chance of reclaiming it.

[Johonny]

11. On the other hand

Gore won the popular vote, something Bill couldn't do.

[NoGOPZone]

72. Clinton didn't win the popular vote?

1992

Clinton - 43%
Bush - 37.4%
Perot - 18.9%


1996

Clinton - 49.2%
Dole - 40.7%
Perot - 8.4%


:shrug:

[Winterblues]

29. And the only one to get Re-Elected since FDR

He was intrumental in creating the Greatest Economic Expansion in History and slowing if not stopping the outflow of the treasury (Debt~Deficits)...Could he have done more? Probably... but when compared to any other President since JFK..well there is no comparrison..

[coalition_unwilling]

74. Truman and LBJ were both re-elected -n/t

[Winterblues]

76. LBJ was elected one time only

He took over after JFK was killed but only ran for President one time.

[Afje]

7. Clinton

incorporated the Democratic Party into the GOP and the result is the "Corporation Party of America"

[Strawman]

14. He got a nice assist from Ross Perot in 1992

and Dole was a terrible candidate in 1996.

http://www.fairvote.org/plurality/perot.htm

That being said, I don't know if any of the other 1992 candidates could have won even with Perot running. I'd be skeptical of that counterfactual: that Jerry Brown or Paul Tsongas could have won.

[undeterred]

15. He saved it for Hillary.

[burythehatchet]

16. aniceuh!

[Blarch]

17. Didn't he lose a bunch

of seats in Congress while he was in office ?

I wouldn't call that "saving the party"

[Generator]

18. Well he could have

He had everything for awhile. A bright open road. Then he hooked up with Mark Penn, found the "third way" and found it was easy embracing Republican ideals than Democratic ones. Much easier for all concerned except all of us peons.

[SIMPLYB1980]

19. You know what you sound like.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SIMPLYB1980]

21. Straight from the "Grown up."

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

23. LMFAO!!!!!!

:spray:

[burythehatchet]

25. that's hilarious isn't it? does any Hillaroid have an IQ greater than their shoe size?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

30. Definitely Made Me Laugh Out Loud.

And feel free to challenge my IQ anyday... I'd make a fool of ya.

[burythehatchet]

33. Yeah. I'm convinced of that. I think you're a genius.

Someday I will be as intelligent as you and I will be qualified to capitalize every word on my subject line.

[cgrindley]

43. Please tell us your IQ... It'll really impress us... or maybe talk about

the size of your wiener... I'll bet you have a really big truck with giant wheels.

[burythehatchet]

44. 4 cyl honda accord coupe. 30 mpg combined

Wiener - seven and 1/2 inches.
IQ - 137

anything else cupcake?

[cgrindley]

49. You have a 137 IQ? Really? I'll bet you're well educated too?

tell us more...

[burythehatchet]

52. BA - Economics '82

MBA - Finance '97
Chartered Property and Casulaty Underwriter '93
Mainframe programming - '98

What else sweet pea?

[cgrindley]

61. Wow. You're so smart.

we're all really jealous. But seriously, outside of your Second Life avatar, did you graduate from high school?

[burythehatchet]

62. New Rochelle High School - '78. Not sure what Second LIfe is.

Maybe you could tell me?

[cgrindley]

70. Second Life is that place where you're a blue, fuzzy, naked dragon pixie (nt)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

54. You'd Be Right.

Course, I see from what you wrote above, that you're only 'superior'. Awwwww, too bad so sad. Don't be jealous!

:rofl:

[burythehatchet]

27. Hillaroids can't defend positions, just like repukes, they can only

do personal attacks.

[SIMPLYB1980]

31. I think "Go. Fuck. Yourself." Is a personal attack.

Wonder why it's not their anymore? Want some candy kid?

[burythehatchet]

32. damn straight. so is your cute picture of a person with a republican button

KISS MY

[SIMPLYB1980]

37. Picture war!

[cgrindley]

38. Grow up (nt)

[burythehatchet]

40. Fuck off

[cgrindley]

42. Why are anti-Hillary posters so damn transparent?

Why the anger? What's your problem?

[burythehatchet]

46. Hide thread, moron.

[cgrindley]

47. Grow up (nt)

[Hobarticus]

85. Oh, wahh. Are you four? eom

[burythehatchet]

87. Why? are you a child molester?

[Zuiderelle]

88. Your posts are so classy.

[burythehatchet]

92. from a Pelosi Fan I will take that in the highest regard.

:)

;)

:toast:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

22. He Did Save Them In Many Ways.

Personally, I think the Big Dog rocks. I can't wait to see him back in the WH!

[ProfessorGAC]

58. While I Can't Share Your Latter Sentiment,. . .

. . .i do share the former.
The Professor

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. He and the neo-libs "triangulated" it from moderate left to moderate right.

[LanternWaste]

80. Since it seems apropos--

Since it seems apropos--

What's the precise definition of Triangulation in its current usage?

[Selatius]

26. The Democratic Party had degenerated into its weakest state since the 1920s during the Clinton era.

Both houses of congress were firmly under Republican control.

[Az_lefty]

28. for all the good he did, he caused even more harm to our credibility

[cgrindley]

34. Why the insulting garbage? Your opinion is offensive and politically

uneducated. Clinton saved the party. Period.

[burythehatchet]

35. Excellent argumentation style. Princeton debate team, I take it?

[cgrindley]

36. Go spam the primary forum, this is beyond you

go away, crybaby.

[burythehatchet]

39. sure thing sport.

[LanternWaste]

81. it seems to be about as valid in form and format as the OP.

it seems to be about as valid in form and format as the OP.

[cgrindley]

41. Everyone alert on this for flamebait

this sort of crap doesn't even belong in the GD:Primaries cesspit.

[burythehatchet]

45. YES, EVERYONE ALERT ON THIS!!!

and please keep kicking.

Thanks.

[cgrindley]

48. Why don't you have the courage to say "I don't like Hillary because she's a woman"?

That's the subtext in all of these attacks.

[burythehatchet]

50. Are you really that much of a buffoon?

[cgrindley]

51. Just say it... we know that you want to...

Look. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that an attack on Bill Clinton at this moment in time is a thinly veiled attack on Hillary Clinton. That you are attempting to circumvent the NO PRIMARY discussion in GD by presenting a thread so idiotic, so uneducated that I seriously suspect that you live in your parent's basement and that you're 14. Other posters have assumed likewise that you're a kid, trying to troll Clinton supporters... and trying to troll them on the wrong FORUM. Troll away, but do it in the pit that is GD PRIMARIES. This sort of juvenile horseshit isn't wanted in GD. Just go away. Grow up.

[burythehatchet]

53. I was 14 in 1974

I do spend quite a bit of time in my basement, because my woodshop is there.

And again you pathetic idiots have nothing to argue with so all you know about is personal attacks. And when you attack me you will get it right back in your face. :)

[cgrindley]

60. You started this stupid and offensive thread

go shit up the GD: Primaries forum.

[elehhhhna]

55. "...Saved the Republican Party" is more accurate -- and now he's doing it AGAIN.

[Jed Dilligan]

56. The people purporting to support Hillary

are making your argument too easy to win.

[burythehatchet]

57. I wish they had an argument, because a debate void of personal

attacks would be welcome.

[Jed Dilligan]

59. That's what I mean--for the life of me,

I can't find one. As an undecided voter who sees strong negatives in Hillary, I would really like to see something substantial from her side, at least to make me feel better if I am forced to vote for her in November.

What I find is this very weird stuff--trollish to the point of feeling like autotext--always with the crying baby pictures and usually being done by tag teams.

The question is: are we looking into the soul of her campaign, or just more Freeper trolls? Or both?

[burythehatchet]

63. Let me help. There's no scientific basis for this but my observation is that

the supporters reflect the values of the candidate. When Hillary starts race-baiting and playing the woe-is-me-all-the-boys-are-ganging-up-on-me, that's exactly what her supporters will do. So go with your gut. DK was my first choice as well. John is saying everything I need to hear from a candidate;it resonates with me.

What Hillary's supporters don't seem to understand is that the politics of personal attacks is the best way to lose the liberal left. I suppose they'll realize it if she gets the nom and we get President McRomney.

[Jed Dilligan]

66. If that's not a typo, I'd like to see the studies

:)

I'm still wavering between Edwards and Not-Hillary (Obama)--though I must admit that his non-whiteness and youth are, irrationally, plusses for me. Edwards' policies are much more to the point.

I can see that much of the griefing comes from the assumption that a criticism of Hillary is an attack on all women. Obama supporters are better than that; they don't accuse his critics of being Klansmen. (Not that I've seen.)

[burythehatchet]

69. sorry, typo. Changed it, thank you.

[burythehatchet]

73. PLEASE do not give them any ideas.

I think John's biggest plus is that he realized that the senate was not the right forum for him. I'm glad he recognized it and didn't seek to return. That plus the fact that he's declared war on the corporatocracy. The best indicator that he's the One - look at the people who are against him.

[cgrindley]

65. All you post are personal attacks... (nt)

[burythehatchet]

67. XXXO

[Jed Dilligan]

71. All our discussion are belong to them! nt

[cgrindley]

75. :) (nt)

[Proud Liberal Dem]

64. I don't know if Clinton "saved" the Democratic Party

But I'm not convinced that he "killed" it either. IMHO he should've fought harder against the GOP Congress instead of endorsing/signing off on things like NAFTA (in retrospect), DADT, welfare reform, DOMA, and allowing more De-regulation of businesses. And he sure didn't do us any favors by getting intimate with an intern IN the White House when his 1992 Presidential campaign ran into trouble due to revelations of extramarital affairs. That was just inexcusably dumb for an otherwise intelligent person. Of course, like other people have pointed out, nobody died because of it or anything else that Clinton did during his tenure. All this being said, I honestly felt a whole lot better (and safer) when Clinton was in charge than I have the past 7-8 years that Bush/Cheney have been in charge because of his intelligence, fighting spirit, ability to make sensible and WELL-INFORMED decisions and put COMPETENT people in charge of key government posts, and, in spite of the constant 24-7 GOP/MSM "fake scandals" distractions, managed to maintain his focus on important things like the economy and fighting terrorism, and avoided any (self-made) major military disasters (other than Somalia, which compared to Iraq, was much ado about nothing even though the GOP made such a big issue out of it at the time).

[cgrindley]

68. I think that you're forgetting history

back then, globalization, the world as village, free trade... these were seen as progressive ideas. The repukes were hard core protectionists... don't you remember the protests against foreign imports, the buy America campaigns from the right wing?

As it turns out, globalization and free trade were stupid ideas. We were wrong. Those were dumb things to support.

Unfortunately, protectionism is also dumb. We're sort of stuck in an unfortunate position, but we can't rewrite the past.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

77. Agreed

We just need to figure out how to ensure that businesses keep at least some of their money (and workers) HERE in the US instead of simply choosing to eliminate good jobs over here just so that they can pocket more coin by outsourcing the jobs to non-unionized people in other countries some of whom can't even understand/speak our language well. I believe that they also need to invest more back here in the US not to mention be held responsible for paying their (currently) meager share of taxes.

[cgrindley]

78. I don't know if there is a way forward that isn't protectionist

that's the only way to safeguard union jobs... that's if we value union labor any more. I'm assuming that we do although a number of those voters have abandoned the party for the Repukes. And, quite frankly, although I'm unionized labor, I think that my union has lost its way and no longer cares about its traditional membership. The other problem with protectionism is that the US couldn't actually survive on its own without the economy being even worse off. I think it's a disaster all the way around, but it's not Bill's fault. Everyone on the left thought globalization was a good thing back then... it was part of diversity and multi-culturalism and so on. We just plain got it wrong.

I guess it's probably too late to withdraw from NAFTA and WTO--the EU is so powerful now that it could easily smack the US into compliance on just about any issue if push came to shove. Yeah. It's bad all around.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

82. It probably is too late

I thought that NAFTA seemed like a good thing at the time and cheered on Al Gore over Ross Perot during their public debate about it but the results haven't been quite as fortuitous for our country in general as it could've been for some of the reasons I mentioned in my last post. I doubt that going the opposite direction and becoming "protectionist" is the right way to go, however, if that is even possible like you say at this point. But I don't really blame Clinton for what happened because I genuinely believe(d) that he was promoting NAFTA and expanded free trade for positive reasons and the economy actually did pretty well during his time in office, especially since, at the time, key government agencies that regulated businesses weren't generally being run (like it is now) by people whom used to work in corporations that are/were regulated by their respective agency and whom are now using their positions to essentially sabotage their own agency's efforts to regulate their former business interests. Bill Clinton may not have been the second coming of FDR but he certainly wasn't one of the "horsemen" of the Democratic apocalypse that some people want to make him out to be. I think that the problem with the Democratic Party has a lot more to do with the entrenched "go along to get along" leadership of the party more so than with one successful but somewhat flawed 2-term Democratic president.

[cgrindley]

83. What people forget about FDR

is that he was fairly divisive at the time and that his ideas were subject to all manner of court challenge over their constitutionality. I doubt that he would have gotten away with 1/10th of the things that he was able to get away with today. You can't tell me that any of his vast projects would make it through a modern congress. Those were different times. He was a god, though. The greatest of all presidents.

[Midwestern Democrat]

89. This was not true of rank and file Democrats.

The neoliberal wing of the Democratic Party were hardcore globalists, but traditional rank and file Democrats were much more protectionist in outlook than the GOP. It was the Democrats who bailed out Chrysler Motor Corporation(Lee Iacocca said in his autobiography that Chrysler would no longer exist if a Republican had been in office when he applied for a government loan); it was the Democratic House that passed the Domestic Content bill in the early 1980s (a bill which would have required a certain percentage of every automobile sold in the U.S. to be manufactured domestically - it never reached the Senate floor); it was the Democratic House that prevented Ronald Reagan from pursuing free trade in the 1980s (Reagan was forced to negotiate bilateral trade deals instead).

Take a look at the NAFTA vote in both houses (support for free trade was much stronger among the GOP than Democrats):

Senate:

Democrats: 28 Nay 27 Yea 1 Not Voting
Republicans: 10 Nay 34 Yea

House:

Democrats: 102 Yea 156 Nay
Republicans: 132 Yea 43 Nay
Independents: 1 Nay

[MadHound]

91. I think that you're making up history

NAFTA was a trick cooked up by the corporate backers of Poppy Bush. He handed it off too Clinton, who after consulting with his corporate decided he'd sing the same tune. Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of good progressives were out in the streets around the country and around the world, working with all our strength and heart to derail NAFTA.

Please don't twist history to serve your own ends.

[NorthernSpy]

79. the Clinton presidency was bad for Democrats...

He sold us out every chance he got. And other than that, he accomplished essentially nothing.


No idea why some people still adore him.

[nosmokes]

86. Is that like 'we had to destroy the village in order to save it?'

[burythehatchet]

93. that is a very weighty question

because I get the impression that we are the precipice of a major party split. Remember, the conservatives of yesterday would be considered flaming liberals today on many issues. The country has lurched so far to the right that a major chunk of the party's base is disillusioned to the extreme of sitting out. How crazy is that after the past 7 years? That in itself is the major reason for JED's appeal. The populus is starving for a populist message.

The party may suffer badly this cycle.

[leftofthedial]

90. from a horrible future of serving the interests of the people

and neglecting the poor, powerless corporations

and from a future of being forever labeled as "progressive" or, worse yet, "liberal."