Bill Clinton's legacy - a reality check

[hedgehog]

Any discussion of Bill Clinton's presidency is skewed by the Monica Lewinsky affair. Any discussion of that is skewed by the antics of the the Right Wing. One side points to Al Gore's paper thin victory, the other points to Bill's polling numbers, the first side answers is that the numbers were a referendum on impeachment, etc, etc. Any discussion of NAFTA, Welfare Reform, Health Care Reform, Don't Ask, Don't Tell etc. gets swept away.

So, is there a way to capture what Bill Clinton actually meant to a lot of people?

I present to you the 1996 Tree House of Horror episode of the Simpsons which featured a vignette in which evil aliens Kang and Kodos kidnap Bill Clinton and Bob Dole and substitute themselves. The point of the episode was that there was no discernible difference between voting Republican or Democrat.

Now, I know I'm going to get flamed for considering a piece of animation as serious political commentary. Never-the-less, I offer this as proof a significant number of Americans in 1996 were frustrated because they believed that no matter which candidate took the Presidency, their lives would not change. Does that mean Americans were happy with their lives in 1996? Given that the episode finished with Homer pulling a rock up the side of a pyramid, I'd say not.

[havocmom]

1. NAFTA = the gift that keeps on taking

And I don't cotton to any pol who doesn't see that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. So, is there a way to capture what Bill Clinton actually meant to a lot of people?

Peace (and) prosperity

DSB

[hedgehog]

3. That image is seen through the lens of George W. Bush

I'm trying to capture the earlier image of Bill Clinton. Clearly, in 1996, at least some people didn't see a huge difference between him and Bob Dole on a policy level. When people refer to Bill CLinton as being part of the DLC or Republican-Lite, this is what they mean.

[1corona4u]

4. Bill Clinton legacy;

Clinton left office with a 65% approval rating, the highest end-of-presidency rating of any President that came into office after World War II.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton

Seems we have some hypocrites amongst us...

[hedgehog]

7. You didn't understand the point of the OP. I think the high end-of-presidency

ratings for Bill Clinton were in a large part dis-approval rating of the Radical Right such as Newt Gingrich. I think the Simpson program broadcast during the 1996 election season captured public opinion that it made no difference for the average person whether Bill Clinton or Bob Dole became president. I would further propose that Al Gore's paper thin victory in 2000 was a further reflection of this belief. In addition, I would suggest that Democrats who voted for Nader were expressing their discontent at a Democratic Party that had swerved across the center to the Right.

[1corona4u]

22. Oh, I understood it.

[BenDavid]

5. No, you have it wrong> The american people tried hard to

tell the republicans not to impeach President Clinton. This reminds me of the GOP's impeachment fever back in 1998. Bill's impeachment was like a criminal assault and battery. NOTHING was going to stop that impeachment because they had the fever.
The GOP was "caught up" with impeachment fever - that's all they could see or hear. Bill's approval rating was in the 70s - and voters clearly didn't want him to be impeached, but like the criminal who can't stop until he gets caught, it was GOING to happen.

Hell, the GOP lost seats in November of 1998 - but that didn't matter to them. NOTHING was going to stop that impeachment because they had the fever. They lived and breathed impeachment the way some people are now living and breathing "Stop her!"

IF YOU,LIKE ANOTHER CANDIDATE BETTER THAN HRC,VOTE FOR HIM ...... But when I read some of the vitriol directed towards HRC, some of you got the fever like the republicans had, and that tells me something.

And to THOSE DEMOCRATS, "I'll vote Republican before I'll vote for Her," Democrats need to worry because your "Stop her!" fever is turning you into what the GOP was in 1998.

Finally, Have you kids ever seen an old game show called, "Let's Make a Deal?"Obama reminds me of that show. America has a choice between the team that beat the Fascist dogs twice,(both were war heroes OR they can have what's behind Door Number Two. If you remember this show, sometimes the surprise behind the door was a new car but sometimes there'd be a goat or maybe a pile of bricks or 20 gallons of milk. Obama (if the nominee) certainly may turn out to be the brand new car we hope he'll be, but what if he turns out to be a goat? Are we a nation of high stakes gamblers? Are we willing to bet our future on what's behind Door Number Two?

[durrrty libby]

6. 89% of dems like and admire Bill. The other 11% of moronic losers post here

They only dislike Bill because he is doing such a great job campaigning for Hillary

All this other crap is just sour grapes. BooHoo

[hedgehog]

8. Given that at least in part the primaries have become a

referendum on the Bill Clinton presidency, the fact that Hillary CLinton is getting about 51% to 29% of the actual vote after months of campaigning suggests that your 89%/11% figures are wrong.

[durrrty libby]

9. No my numbers are correct. Go look it up and this

"referendum on the Bill Clinton presidency" is Bullshit spewed by crybaby Bo supporters

[hedgehog]

13. If it's not at least in part a referendum on the Bill Clinton presidency,

and note that I said "in part", then

1. Why are Bill Clinton's popularity polls from 1999 and 2000 constantly invoked?

2. Why does Hillary Clinton ask us to consider her 35 years of experience, including 8 years in the Clinton
White House?

3. Why are the Clinton years constantly presented as some sort of lost Golden Age?

[hedgehog]

14. If it's not at least in part a referendum on the Bill Clinton presidency,

and note that I said "in part", then

1. Why are Bill Clinton's popularity polls from 1999 and 2000 constantly invoked?

2. Why does Hillary Clinton ask us to consider her 35 years of experience, including 8 years in the Clinton
White House?

3. Why are the Clinton years constantly presented as some sort of lost Golden Age?

[dmallind]

11. apples and....unicorns

Liking or disliking Bill Clinton doesn't mean you automatically like his wife better than the other viable candidates, nor should it. The point, and a true one, is that BilL Clinton remains extremely popular with the mainstream Democrats and indies, and is viciously reviled by right wingers and a tiny revisionist slice of the far left who think unemployment at a 30 year low, median incomes rising in realand nominal terms, 23 million new jobs (and remember the "they were all McJobs" crap would be more meaningful if that could be explained in the context of rising median incomes and spending power), plummetting crime rates, international respect, a more progressive tax rate and the first government surplus in 40 years are horrible crimes against the American people.

I think Bill Clinton was a heck of a president and I'll be chuffed to little mintballs if the next one, whatever their name is, can do half as well at getting us out of a Republican morass. I ain't voting for Hillary, although I have no strong animosity towards her and would be pleased to campaign for her should she be our nominee.

I'm in the 89 and not in the 51 (since I live in NY it will probably be higher than that). Liking Bill doesn't mean choosing Hillary except to idiots, but liking or hating Bill doesn't mean hating her either - except to even worse idiots.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[Rageneau]

12. Kang? Kodos? I'll vote for the one who looks most like Clinton.

Some bozos think there's no difference between Clinton and Dole, or Clinton and Bush, or Clinton and any Rethuglican, but there is -- Clinton looks and talks better than any Rethug.

Beginning with looks and extending through every other possible way, Clin-tonn is far superior to these frustrated conservative creatures.

[terisan]

15. Balanced Budget:Clinton vs Trillion dollar growth in Deficit:Bush

Clinton put us in line to start attacking the deficit. Bush destroyed that by spending surplus on tax cuts for wealthy. No elected or selected Republican pres has been truly fiscally responsible since Eisenhower.

[terisan]

16. Supreme Court Justices: Clinton/Ginsberg vs Bushes/Thomas+Alito+Roberts

I see a BIG DIFFERENCE

[hedgehog]

17. You see the difference, I see the difference, but did/do most

Americans see the difference? I also have to ask, isn't it rather a low bar when all we ask of a President from the Democratic Party that he or she make a decent appointment to the Supreme Court? Not to mention, Bill CLinton was unable to force a Republican Congress to move ahead on his appointments to the lower courts. He either wasn't able to or didn't bother to motivate the public to pressure Congress to do so, either. As a result, our lower courts (which are the feeder courts for the Supreme Court) are packed with Bush appointees.

[terisan]

19. I have a strong impression that you do not have a uterus. Clinton is the only candidate

who can be trusted to support choice.

[hedgehog]

20. See - I told my kids I found them all in the cabbage patch!

Seriously - are you saying that Obama would back a repeal of Roe v Wade?

[terisan]

21. I am saying I trust Clinton to appoint pro choice SC justices. I don't trust Obama to do so. I do

not get a sense of commitment from him on that. As he has said, he might get a revelation.

Clinton's commitment is long term. While it is possible for any candidate to make a sudden future change, I think it far less likely that Clinton would do so.

[Nedsdag]

23. Are you fucking kidding me?

What gives you the impression Obama will choose pro-life judges?

He gets high marks from Planned Parenthood and it's STILL isn't good enough for the Clintonites.

Put the Hillary Kool-Aid down and face reality please????

[terisan]

27. Ask Obama to make the commitment and see if he is willing. Read his "revelation" comment

Also remember that his Illinois Planned Parenthood rating as based on many votes of "present." While it may have been his and their strategy it was objected to by other women's rights groups and served to make him seem less committed to right to choose. It leaves anti-abortion voters thinking he may come around to their point of view. He himself has said he might have just such a "revelation."

H Clinton has several decades of history on women's rights and hasn't wavered.

I am a citizen and a voter, and I leave the Kool-aid drinking for those who want to hope.

I look for Verification.

[Nedsdag]

29. I don't know what he has to do to prove he's pro-choice.

But he is PRO-CHOICE. What part of pro-choice don't you get?

[suston96]

18. Repeating but worth it: a 5.6 trillion projected surplus after those final years....

...of budget surpluses. Also, a couple of cash payments by Clinton on the national debt. That 5.6 trillion projected surplus? Bush immediately wiped it out with tax cuts for his wealthy contributors and his wars of adventure.

[no name no slogan]

24. The problem with huge budget surpluses

is that they show that 1) the tax system is inefficient, and 2) that people who really NEED help from the government (the poor and disadvantaged) are probably not getting it.

Clinton's welfare "reform" got a lot of people off welfare, but did so by putting poor people into sub-poverty wage-paying jobs. It did little to address the root problems of welfare recipients: poverty.

During Clinton's terms, the rich got richer, the poor stayed poorer, and the middle class just barely hung on. Not exactly a great record for a Democratic president.

[ShaneGR]

26. You're NUTS

The middle class GREW during the Clinton years, and has since shrunk after 2000. It's ridiculous to say that the middle class "barely hung on" during the Clinton years. That's just not true.

[no name no slogan]

30. Barely hung on by borrowing more

Consumer debt started its climb upward during the Clinton administration, thanks in part to Clinton/Greenspan's policies of encouraging loose credit. Like it or not, the current mess we're in started in the 1990s, when consumer credit became cheaper to borrow and spend than it did to save.

The middle class hung on to what it had-- and only grew through excessive borrowing of cheap credit, effective shifting wealth up the food chain to the wealthy.

And yes, compared to Dubya he was downright inspired. But his economic policies weren't much better than those of Nixon.

[terisan]

28. add no brains:)

[AJH032]

31. Check Your Facts

Budget surpluses in and of themselves do not show anything. They can stem from many things, and I highly doubt an inefficient tax system was the culprit (it could easily be argued that taxes are always inefficient, in which case by your logic, surpluses should be expected much more often). In the 1990's case, it was likely the increase in taxes, the considerable decrease in military expenditures, and a fueled GDP growth that caused the surpluses.

If you want to see how people's lives actually changed during Clinton's presidency, you can look at the decrease in the national poverty rate, the decrease in unemployment, the record increase in jobs, the decrease in short and long term interest rates making it easier for people to live.

Some of your claims are simply lies (the poor did not stay poorer; I don't even know what you mean by the "middle class just barely hung on").

[no name no slogan]

32. "Did you hear 7 million new jobs were created last month?"

"Yeah, I've got three of them."

Job creation in and of itself is not a big deal. It's the QUALITY of those jobs that matter.

Many of the jobs created in the 90s were crappy McJobs in the service industry-- the type of jobs where it takes two full-time jobs to cobble together the income needed to support a family.

Like I said, Clinton was a brief respite from Reagan/Bush, but he did not represent a break from the past. He kept Greenspan in control of the Fed (whose mission was to keep wages down, which he himself said repeatedly).

I'm not completely dissing Clinton, I AM saying that as far as the economy goes and helping working families, he was extremely average.

[ShaneGR]

25. News Flash, Not Many People Care about the Lewinsky thing anymore

Most sane people look back fondly on the relative calm and high success of the 90s. Eight Years of W Bush have seen to that.