General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsImpeachment Lessons: What saved Clinton from Nixon's fate
Pew Research wrote in 2009 (emphasis added):
Of all the opinions that polls have tracked in the modern era, none has been more remarkable than President Bill Clintons approval ratings rising on the news of allegations that he had carried on an affair with a White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. A Pew Research Center poll in mid-January 1998 found that 61% of its respondents approved of the way the president was handling his job.11 Two weeks later, Clintons ratings spiked to 71%, reflecting public outrage over the way the media had prejudged Clintons guilt.12 The same trend was recorded in Gallup and other national surveys. The Pew Research poll analysis found the public more discontented with the presidents accusers in the news media than upset by Clintons alleged misbehavior.13
The publics unexpected rallying to Clintons side led to a transformation of the Washington establishments judgment of his political viability. Before news of Clintons polling boost, political insiders had all but written him off. Public support for the president allowed, if not encouraged, congressional Democrats to rally to his side.
The impact of Clintons standing in the polls along with growing antipathy toward the presidents accusers were also potent factors in the impeachment debate and the broader politics of that contentious midterm year. The public stood by Clinton through each chapter of the saga: his grand jury testimony, his admission of lying, the revelations of the Starr report, and ultimately the Republican vote to impeach him. He ended the year with a 71% approval rating. His party actually picked up eight seats in the House of Representatives an unusual occurrence for a second-term president, let alone one about to be impeached. It is inconceivable to think that public opinion could have had such an impact in an era prior to the emergence of the media polls.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)He hadnt done anything worthy of impeachment
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,775 posts)world wide wally
(21,718 posts)I would be willing to take those odds.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)n/t
Tom Rinaldo
(22,911 posts)That is why the public rallied to his side. The Republicans were nakedly political in trying to remove him from office over a matter that did not effect national security, did not involve obstruction (Clinton volunteered to testify to a grand jury under oath) and at most involved a single area of untruths concerning a purely personal matter.
Impeachment hearings against Clinton exposed the accusers, not their target. The evidence obviously did not support the proposed remedy. It was a massive Republican over reach. The case against Trump bears no resemblance to the anemic case against Clinton.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,775 posts)1) To make sure the case against tRump is always about the facts, not spin. In interviews and commentary and social posts and chance conversation with pro- and con- people, bring it back to the facts.
When you have strong facts (as Democrats do), try the facts.
When you have no facts (as Republicons do), attack the judge, the jury, the court reporter, the investigators, etc.
This is what tRump is doing. He knows he is guilty so he attacks the ("Mexican" etc) judges, the media, the FBI, and so on.
2) Be ready to impeach quickly when the public opinion crosses 50% in favor of "removal from office".
uponit7771
(90,225 posts).... Gore ran away from the historically popular president.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,775 posts)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_United_States_elections
Article says Democrats gained 8 seats. Perhaps there were three seats elected other than Nov 1998.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,775 posts)With the Republicans having lost 4 House seats and failing to gain any seats in the Senate, it was the first time since 1934 that the non-presidential party failed to gain congressional seats in a mid-term election. [...] It was also the first time since 1822 that the non-presidential party had failed to gain seats in the mid-term election of a President's second term.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,775 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)NewJeffCT
(56,827 posts)A month after the election.
The impeachment trial was in 1999.
Republicans didn't hold any hearings before the election because the Starr Report had been leaked like a sieve over the previous few years and felt the Starr Report spoke for itself.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,775 posts)In November 1998, the Democrats picked up five seats in the House although the Republicans still maintained majority control.[12] The results were a particular embarrassment for House Speaker Newt Gingrich, -- Wikipedia