Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Hillary needs to stop with her bul**hit about DOMA [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)41. There's no need to be snarky and rude, with your "Crystal Ball" comments.
I've provided facts and cites--if you don't read them, that's not my fault.
You seem to forget that that election had the lowest voter turnout of pretty much any election ever. Under fifty percent. That's in your link--did you read it? This is also in your link:
President Clinton's chances of winning were initially considered slim in the middle of his term as his party had lost both the House and the Senate in 1994 for the first time in decades; he had reneged on promises to cut taxes in order to reduce the deficit, enacted a Federal assault weapons ban, and had a failed healthcare reform initiative. He was able to regain ground as the economy began to recover from the early 1990s recession with a relatively stable world stage. He went on to win re-election with a substantial margin in the popular vote and electoral college. Despite Dole's defeat, the Republican Party was able to maintain a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
The voters liked him, personally, but they preferred the GOP platform.
It is obvious to even the most naive student of political science that a shit-flinging contest about how Clinton was "pro-gay marriage" -- at a time when support for gay marriage was under thirty percent--might have gotten out the vote. That could have been ginned up as a dramatic, rallying issue in no time at all. The word would have gone forth from every church in the land, Clinton would have been accused of endangering children and all manner of horrors.
The GOP would have LOVED it if Clinton vetoed that bill--it would have given them something to sink their teeth into. The ads would have run in heavy rotation--the GOP had a lot of money to throw around; they just couldn't find an issue to fire up the electorate about.
Gay marriage (reference the "approval chart" above) had the support of only 27 percent of Americans. All those "disapprovers" would have come out in force and they could very well have shifted the dynamic.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
85 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Hey, I have no problem with that. I remember when she supported DOMA. She was wrong.
sabrina 1
Oct 2015
#80
Bill Clinton won by over 8% over Bob Dole, and given the presence of Ross Perot as spoiler
LostOne4Ever
Oct 2015
#9
I have never denied that he took a bad situation that he was crammed into, and made hay with it.
MADem
Oct 2015
#19
You wrongly assume that everything would have remained static had he vetoed that bill.
MADem
Oct 2015
#20
Why? Because Clinton's top adviser, Dick Morris said he had to go totally 3rd way
jfern
Oct 2015
#23
Dick "Toe Sucker" Morris? You do realize that he is a bloated wastrel with absolutely zero
MADem
Oct 2015
#25
DOMA was voted in by people who hated it, because they were reflecting political reality at the time
MADem
Oct 2015
#33
That is also true. Sanders, for example, stated that his objections had to do with the
MADem
Oct 2015
#39
Here are some things said by the Democrats who voted NO on DOMA, said in the Congress:
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2015
#57
That's just nonsense. You're acting--again--as though everything is static and not dynamic.
MADem
Oct 2015
#30
And you are acting as if you could actually know how things would have went down
LostOne4Ever
Oct 2015
#37
You didn't provide facts to Clinton losing, you provided opinions and are treating them as facts.
LostOne4Ever
Oct 2015
#43
Given that it is impossible to 'prove' a negative, I guess you think you've made your point.
MADem
Oct 2015
#75
He did not shut that conversation down, he delayed it until he was safely out of office, amendment
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2015
#58
How do you change your font and type color? Do you type it elsewhere and copy paste it or
randys1
Oct 2015
#76
He could have let it pass without signing, wanted a popularity boost instead. n/t
cprise
Oct 2015
#18
That makes no sense, either. It's just not accurate. "The Clintons?" Good grief. They aren't
MADem
Oct 2015
#45
It's not PEDANTIC to note that a military instruction is not a law. That's something called a FACT.
MADem
Oct 2015
#47
I really hate to defend the Clintons. But a lot of DUers are completely back asswards on DADT.
ieoeja
Oct 2015
#73
Amicus brief from Senators Bill Bradley, Tom Daschle and Chris Dodd, Alan Simpson
BlueStateLib
Oct 2015
#7
2013 amicus brief from people that were part of the 1996 doma debate should know
BlueStateLib
Oct 2015
#17
I'm gay and I know one gay Hillary supporter. The rest are for Bernie, one or two with great
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2015
#60
It just pisses some people off that the vast majority of minorities love them some Hillary. nt
LexVegas
Oct 2015
#52
What bothers me is the lack of respect for and accurate recounting of the history of those times.
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2015
#61
I'm also puzzled by her need to do the bullshit, I could craft many answers for her that would have
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2015
#66