John Kerry won more votes than Bill Clinton ever did

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

For all the Clintonista strategists to gavot through this forum proclaiming Bill is the light and the way is disengenuous at best.

John Kerry got more votes than any Dem president ever and got FAR more percentagewise than Bill Clinton ever did.

[Julien Sorel]

1. Kerry didn't have to contend with Perot.

And of course, the electorate gets bigger every four years.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. Perot helped Clinton...more repubs than Dem went Perot

[Julien Sorel]

9. Perot still drew several million votes away from Clinton.

Perot drew about 9% in 1996; had he not done so, Clinton would likely have been at about 53-54% of the popular vote.

[wuushew]

3. Perot is a joke

Back when people liked him, his appeal was that as a business man he would somehow bring common sense and fiscal discipline to Washington. Republican cronyism has forever buried that idea.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. Perot Would Have Been A Better Pres Than Bush Or Dole

but he was a nut...

[JohnKleeb]

4. I prefer Kerry to Clinton

I am a member of the 2.5 way btw, not a fan of running to the left everywhere but no fan of the third way proposed by Clinton either. I think this is part of why I liked Kerry, he never said this but it appears he had the same philosophy on it.

[THUNDER HANDS]

5. Kerry ran a fine campaign

Was it perfect?

No.

But who has ever run a perfect campaign?

I'd like to see Clinton get 49% of the vote running without the help of Perot.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

6. Exactly

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Kerry Ran A Fine Campaign

but I think Clinton could have edged the Chimpster this year...

[THUNDER HANDS]

11. if Kerry couldn't win

then NO democrat was going to win. It was a referrendum on Bush and Bush passed. Period. End of story.

Even if you think 3 million votes were fradulent, tht still means we'd barely beat him - not have any sizable majority or mandate.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. i think clinton wins Arkansas and Ohio And Florida

and i said in my post Kerry ran a fine campaign but clinton would have run an out of your mind campaign and get the edge...

[THUNDER HANDS]

18. except for the whole heart attack thing two months ago

other than that, yeah I'm sure he would have done a lot better.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. settiing up strawmen and knocking them down is not debating

i said kerry ran a fine campaign but clinton would have run an out of your mind campaign and won in a squeaker instead of losing in a squeaker...

[THUNDER HANDS]

24. yeah and if FDR was running then he'd blow out bush too

Unfortunately, he's dead.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. i was responding to the original poster

she set up the terms of the debate not me...

[rockydem]

20. Clinton would have beat Bush I have no doubt about that

Clinton has an appeal to the fickle middle that Kerry just doesn't. I'm not knocking Kerry I think he ran a fine campaign. But Clinton has that sparkle in his eyes that draws people to him - the kind of gut level thing that often wins a national election.

Clinton won seats in 1998, right at the height of impeachment.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. This Is Turning Into A Joe Louis-Muhammad Ali Thread....

Would Ali have beat Louis?


Would Louis have beat Ali?


Who the fuck knows...


But we all know they were tremendously gifted boxers and Bill Clinton was a tremendously gifted politician...

The fact that he survived the Monica brouhaha and left office more popular then when he entered is proof of that...

[rockydem]

30. So who would win

Ali in his prime vs. Tyson in his prime.

I'd bet on Ali simply because he was better with the head games. It's how he beat Foreman who in his prime was every bit as formidable as Tyson was in his.

IMO.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. Ali Beats The Young Tyson The Same Way He Beats The Young Foreman...

I also think the young Foreman beats the young Tyson...

[Tatiana]

48. We're missing an important constituency here: THE POOR.

Clinton not only had an appeal to the middle, but the poor voted for him in droves because he gave them hope that things could be better. I know personally, because I was once on welfare, and I, too was a single parent as Clinton's mom was.

I got my degree under Clinton, because of Clinton, because policies he instituted to allow me to write my college expenses of my taxes. Did we hear ANY candidate (Bush or Kerry) mention the poor? No, we didn't. So we built a candidacy on the middle class (which by a narrow margin decided to go for Bush) while ignoring a large segment of our country that is still living in povery.

I'll bet those poor people stayed home because we never gave them a reason to come out and vote for change. Clinton did.

[Hippo_Tron]

59. Kerry talked about healthcare for all Americans and college for all kids

Raising of the minimum wage, etc. He had several policies to help the poor as well as the working middle class. What did Clinton do that he didn't? The only thing missing from the picture is that Clinton is from a poor background and Kerry is from a very well-off background.

[springhill]

36. Clinton has left me a little curios about him.........

He either just doesn't know the real danger this country is in or he is a part of it. Whenever I hear him he just says the same old things, as if this was just another chapter in our history that we are going through. For instance, on the media. He is constantly defending them, even after what he went through in his own administration. How can we know the danger and he not? Is there a difference between what the republicans want and what the democrats want, and I mean the Powerful ones. There will always by the Wellstones, Kucinich's and such, but they don't control the party.
Maybe I am being too paranoid, but maybe the democrats and republicans are just melding into one fascist party. I mean look at how they are talking now. More religion? More talk about values? They are more and more talking and walking like republicans, and it scares the hell out of me.

[JohnKleeb]

10. yeah I agree

[RummyTheDummy]

33. Woulda, coulda, shoulda

Clinton won two presidential elections. Kerry has won zero. Revisionist history is fun and all, but the proof is in the pudding. End of story.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

51. Yep..anything is possible with help dividing the Repub vote

you're right ;-)

[Hippo_Tron]

58. He did actually...

When he was re-elected, Clinton won 49% of the popular vote. And those of you who bash Clinton for being too "centrist" forget that the GOP destroyed many of the good things that he wanted to do.

[JohnKleeb]

12. another thing NSMA

Kerry won Fairfax County, Virginia something that Clinton never did. It was like 53-46% btw.

[wuushew]

13. Fuck Clinton

In 1980 Carter got 41% of the popular vote with the simultaneous problems of a bad economy and a foriegn policy crisis.


Clinton needs to gracefully exit the stage along with all the other DLCers. His comments on Iraq are especially irksome.

[THUNDER HANDS]

14. he's just covering for his wife

when she starts running in 3 years. Expect to see Hillary attending church a lot in the next few months.

[wuushew]

16. I will not vote for her in the primaries

Hopefully Dennis Kucinich will run again.

[rockydem]

22. You'll vote for her in the end if she wins (assuming she runs)

That is, if you're reallly a Democrat....

[wuushew]

23. That is why I said Primaries

I had no problems voting for Kerry this time. I have no wish to curse Amerika with a criminal evil leader.

[rockydem]

26. good

any Democrat is better than these thugs...

Both the Clintons' hearts are in the right place.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. He Got 43% And Damn Near 400 Electoral College Votes...

What foreign policy crisis?




I'm not defending all of his actions just his perforance as a candidate...

[JohnKleeb]

19. Carter's foreign policy crisis was what happened in Iran

though apparently, Bruce Lainier who I met this past thursday doesnt blame Carter and actually is appreciatitve of what he did.

[Mr.Green93]

62. he'd like it

[Tatiana]

27. I don't think Bill in terms of strategy is the light and the way.

But honestly, if it were Constitutionally possible for Bill Clinton to run again, he'd win (and he's probably the ONLY Dem at this point who could have beat Bush). He has that charisma, he has that empathy. When he says "I feel your pain," people believe him. The only other Dem I see with such charisma is Obama, and he's far from ready for the Presidency.

I don't blame Kerry for the loss. But as a party, we have got to find someone with Clinton's charisma who knows how to frame issues in a way that the rest of the country will understand and agree with. Putting the way the Kerry campaign was run aside, Kerry homself was not good enough at framing and defining certain issues such as gay marriage, the Vietnam/Swift Boat accusations, his IWR vote, etc. He allowed the Republicans to define him. Clinton never allowed the Republicans to do that, and when they tried, his response was swift and definitive.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. Look At All The Baggage Clinton Overcame..

Draft Dodger...


Womanizer.....


Slick Wille....


And he overcame it all....


He would have beat Bush like a red headed step child...


Bill Clinton's working class southern creds were real not learned sucking the teat of Karl Rove...

[Tatiana]

44. EXACTLY!

The reason why the Republicans hated Clinton so much was because they couldn't beat him, even playing dirty.

Draft Dodger...

The war was immoraland a mistake. I stood by my convictions.

Womanizer.....

The Republicans have to pay people to accuse me. Those who know me, know I respect women. Besides, whatever Hillary and I have been through, we're still married. Many prominent Republicans are on their second and third wives.

Slick Wille....

A slur Republicans devised to demean me, simply because I am a person who rose out of poverty, raised by a single mom, to become the most powerful man in the world. I am the physical embodiment of the hope other poor and struggling children have that they can make it in America too.

Clinton defined himself, not the Republicans, and he was tested in ways no other politician on this planet has been tested before. And he emerged victorious every time. I think there is a lesson to be learned in that.

[THUNDER HANDS]

28. OH, HE ALSO RAISED MORE MONEY THAN BOTH CLINTON CAMPAIGNS

combined!

$220 million.

[RummyTheDummy]

32. Question?

How many presidential elections did Bill Clinton win?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. I Didn't Want To Be So Blunt

How are we served by pooping on one of the few Democratic heroes alive....

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

40. The one that lost us congress during his tenure? Yeah that helped

as did numerous state party losses during his tenure. He managed to save HIS position at the expense of the party and that means we should listen to him? I'll listen to Bill Clinton when I need advice on saving his ass. Otherwise, it seems the party suffered greatly under him starting in 96.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. we lost seats in 00 ,02 and 04

without Clinton on the ballot...

That's a trend for another thread...

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

37. Fine but stop pretending he did it without Perot's intervention

That's a nice binary thought. He won. But he did NOT win a TWO way race, he won a THREE way race. Now look at raw vote percentages and tell me Clinton had more Americans for him than John Kerry did.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. I think He Still Beats Bush And Dole..

He beats Papa Bush 51-49 and Bob Dole 54% -46%


I am saying that Perot voters were slightly more Pug then Dem and allocate 60% of them to Dole and Bush...

I'm being generous because in 1992 before Perot got back in the race Clinton was beating Papa Bush by 20%...

[wuushew]

38. The Presidency is not the sum total of governmental power

How do you explain the slow but steady loss of House and Senate seats as well govenorships from 1994 onwards? Bush has been "re"elected and at the same time increased the grip the GOP has. By that logic Bush is superior to Clinton.

[Leilani]

39. It's pretty hard to compare Clinton & Kerry

because their elections were in such different times...

Clinton was lucky that he ran on domestic issues, in a peaceful time.

Kerry had to run after we went through 9/11 & there is a war in Iraq.

It's hard to run against the Commander-in-Chief.

On the other hand, Clinton is a brilliant strategist, & would have painted Bush as a radical, instead of letting Bush define Kerry as out of the mainstream liberal. Clinton made Gingrich & his cohorts nuts with his abilities.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

41. Excuse me but Clinton didn't have a muzzle on through the election

and Kerry didn't distance himself from Clinton. Clinton had ample opportunity to do this. He didn't.

[Leilani]

45. Excuse me, but I thought we were comparing their election results

Clinton with a muzzle? I don't understand your comment. Are you saying Clinton should have helped Kerry more?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

50. Sorry Leilani, I've no bone to pick with you (just angry not at you)

I was responding to this comment On the other hand, Clinton is a brilliant strategist, & would have painted Bush as a radical, instead of letting Bush define Kerry as out of the mainstream liberal. Clinton made Gingrich & his cohorts nuts with his abilities.

Seems to me most of Clinton's appearances had to do with his book than his country and the mess it is in...yeah he may be a brilliant strategist in many ways..but if one of them is backing off of bigotry I can't support that strategy..I would not have in the 60's were I of voting age and I won't now.

Sorry for the prior post seeming nasty toward you..it wasn't my intention.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. Clinton's Advice To Kerry To Endorse The Anti Gay Marriage

Amendments was morally and strategically flawed...

That being said insiders were desperate to see us losing the race to the Chimpster...

Carville was literally at the point of tears...

And he spent a lot of capital on allowing gays to serve in the military....

[sangh0]

53. Clinton NEVER said that

An article in a paper owned by Rupert Murdoch said it.

And he spent a lot of capital on allowing gays to serve in the military....

Clinton exhausted a lot of political capital fighting for gay rights, and still got re-elected, so why would he tell Kerry to endorse anti-gay marriage amendments?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

54. The article is quoting a newsweek article. Newsweek isn't owned

by Murdoch.

[sangh0]

55. Really?

I read it in a piece by the London Times, and another DUer said that's where Newsweek got it from.

Furthermore, it doesnt make sense that Clinton would say that. Though he wasn't at the forefront of the gay rights movement, he did take a few knocks for what he did do, and he still got re-elected.

Finally, I refuse to believe bad things about a Democrat merely because some "journalist" claims, based on unnamed sources, that a Dem said something.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

56. We shall see in the coming weeks whether it pans out or not

I'm willing to back off til then if you're willing to admit you were wrong if it proves to be true.

[sangh0]

57. No problem

but I doubt we're ever going to get to the bottom of this one.

[Leilani]

63. No problem, nsma!

I just really didn't understand your point.

Clinton can be infuriating, & in spite of his talents & successes, it has always been about him & Hillary, & what is best for them.

[sonicx]

46. He probably didn't because the press would have ignored Kerry

and just listened to Clinton diss Bush.

[wuushew]

47. That would work fine

Since some claim this election was ABB, anything that further demonized Bush would have been a good thing. People would not have forgotten to vote straight party ticket in the voting booth.

[Leilani]

49. One thing I know for sure...

Clinton didn't have Bob Shrum running his campaign.

Shrum was associated with Dukakis, Mondale, Gore, & Kerry.

Please retire Bob Shrum.

If there is ONE thing to fix, retire Bob Shrum.

[JI7]

60. Bill Clinton is just being realistic

he has a good understanding of how people are around the country.

Kerry did do very well and he won among independents and moderates. he also won on the issues that matter.

the only thing bush had going for him was that anti gay amendments on the ballots. this partly helped pad his popular vote by increasing turnout in solid red states. but this also helped in ohio. there were some things during the end with republicans starting the gay bashing, but most people just saw that as some last minute desperate moves. but rove had been working for a few years on GOTV with churches. and putting that amendment on the ballots helped increase their turnout.florida also had a parental notification for abortions thing on their ballots so i'm sure that helped bush.

i think rather than talk about US compromising on issues like gay rights and abortion. we need to talk about how to get THEM to accept it. there truly is a cultural divide and listening to some people they saw kerry as someone without faith. even with bill clinton they saw him as believing in god but having sinned. but with kerry they saw him as someone who was a threat to their culture, someone without values. at first i thought the whole crap about republicans spreading rumors that kerry as going to take away their bibles and other shit was just pathetic. but in certain parts of the country and for certain people it does work.

one good thing kerry did was show that we DO have power. Kerry didn't lose like dukakis , mondale or mcgovern. this is why i don't think we need to have a huge change in strategy. if kerry had won ohio or florida all the talk would probably be about the power of the younger voters.

so how do we get THEM to accept people who are different rather than us changing ?

[Toucano]

61. Good point. n/t

[Philostopher]

64. Bill Clinton had the instincts of a rock star or a natural athlete.

Politics to Clinton was like water to a fish. Strategy wasn't the issue, with him -- you don't need strategy when you've got a guy with that kind of charisma and intuition about things. He was good, he didn't need genius campaign advice.

I read something that someone posted here from, I believe it was, Newsweek that said both Kerry and Edwards had wanted to hit the SwiftLiars thing and hit it hard in August, when the SCLM started giving the Bush campaign free advertising by making this a big whoop-de-do. Others on the campaign staff said no, they should just ignore it -- it was 'beneath the image' I guess. It would go away if they just ignored it and 'took the high road.'

You know what? If they'd hit that, and hit it hard, they might have squeaked out a couple of percentage points in a couple of states that weren't more than a couple of percentage points apart. And John Kerry wanted to address it, and John Edwards wanted to address it, but their freakin' wonks said 'no.'

After reading that, and knowing as I do that those ads hurt Kerry in Ohio as much as anything did, I have to say -- I can't blame the guy for the failure here. Letting that stuff fester was one of the biggest mistakes they made, and apparently that was not what Kerry wanted to do. Anybody who wants to finger their regrets and blame John Kerry needs to remember that little tidbit.

Clinton's nearest and dearest advisor was Jim "Gator" Carville, who's of the LBJ school of politics -- 'I don't care if he never had sexual congress with a pig ... make the bastard deny it!' Nothing went more than two days without Clinton addressing it, and I doubt Carville ever second-guessed his intuition about those things. I think, ultimately, second-guessing the candidate's own intuition about issues like this is the worst of all possible worlds. I don't know if it would have made a difference in the ultimate result or not -- but the thought that it might have kind of pisses me off.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

65. Yep. Clinton pissed me off last week with his post mortem

Kerry did just fine. He only needed to be more "cuddly" and he would have won.

[pmbryant]

66. While I agree with the premise behind this post, it isn't quite accurate

The second part of this claim isn't true:

John Kerry got more votes than any Dem president ever and got FAR more percentagewise than Bill Clinton ever did.

Percentagewise, Kerry in 2004 didn't do quite as well as Clinton in 1996.

Kerry 2004 = 48.01% (56.1 million votes)
Clinton 1996 = 49.23% (47.4 million votes)

Clinton had the full power of incumbency behind that performance, though.

--Peter

[WI_DEM]

67. yes, but many more people voted in 2004 than '92 or '96

so that is like comparing apples and oranges. Clinton got 43% in '92 the year Perot got 19% but in '96 he got 49% so if he had as many voters turning out in '96 as turned out this time Clinton would have had more votes.