The Clintons are the only Dems to beat the Republicans in 30 years

[billbuckhead]

The Clintons are the only Dems to beat the Republicans in 30 years for POTUS. +4 terms as governor of a border state. Hillary scared Guiliani out her senate race.

Obama beat Alan Keyes.

[speedoo]

1. "The Clintons"?

The only rethugs Hillary has beaten are a couple of hacks.

[maddiejoan]

2. actually four hacks

she trounced two of them (Pirro and Rudy) so badly they dropped out.

[billbuckhead]

5. Sad you can't give Hillary any credit for Bill's huge success?

If Big Dog was a CEO and they got divorced, she would get a big part of his earnings.

[Lerkfish]

13. are you going to give Guiliani's wife credit for his success?

michele Obama?
Pickles"?

listen, I think Clinton is an ok senator, and a good lawyer, but I find trying to call being first lady "experience" distasteful, as its anathematic to women's rights, IMHO.

[billbuckhead]

17. Being first lady isn't a powerful political position?

Why is it distasteful?

[Lerkfish]

24. ask Pickles

its not an elected office, and its not a position. Its a marital status.
You can have powerful women as first ladies, but that does not equate to political experience. I'm sorry, this is the absolute weakest of your arguments for clinton, and I'm a little surprised when you guys keep bringing it up.

[WinkyDink]

80. Hee. Which wife?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

36. Ross Perot deserves more credit.

Not to mention the walking corpse Bob Dole.

[Lerkfish]

44. OMG! remember how ghoulish Dole was during the debates?

he basically argued he should be president because he was fantastically old and deserved it after his long career.

[mod mom]

75. and Jackson Stephens:

Stephens was also the biggest financial backer of the Clinton-Gore campaign. The Little Rock investment banker had supported Clinton in each of his campaigns for governor, raised $100,000 in contributions for the 1992 Clinton-Gore campaign, and extended a $3.5 million line of credit to the campaign through his bank. Hillary Rodham Clinton, while a partner at the Rose law firm in Little Rock, had represented a company controlled by the Stephens family.

Stephens' also had strong ties to previous presidents and was a major contributor to the Republican party. In 1991, Stephens had arranged a bail-out for a small Texas oil company on the verge of bankruptcy, according to the Wall Street Journal. One of the company's directors and stockholders was George W. Bush, now the leading Republican candidate for president. The Stephens family also contributed to the campaign that won him his current job, Governor of Texas.

-snip

http://www.ohiocitizen.org/campaigns/wti/jennl.html

[DangerDave921]

68. So?

Apples and oranges. So because she would get a hefty divorce settlement means that she was instrumental in beating the Repubs? I don't get the analogy.

Bill Clinton beat the Repubs twice. That's Bill, not Hillary. HRC has never even been seriously challenged for office, until now that is. LOL. I'd hate to be on the receiving end of her wrath if she loses to Obama tomorrow.

[razorman]

26. Remember also, it was because of them that the Republicans

were able to take control of Congress in 1994. The Democratic party did not advance during the Clinton years.

[Rageneau]

42. How was that the fault of the Clintons?

Think they WANTED Newt and all those endless witch hunts? Impeachment? Travelgate? Et cetera ad infinitum?

If you hold them responsible for the rise of the GOP, what exactly did they do to cause it? Balance the budget? Try to provide health care for every American? Normalize relations with Viet Nam? What?

Seems to me, the Clintons were bigger victims of the right-wing and its corporate media, even, than the rest of us were. And they were also among the first victims of the the new and awful WIMPINESS of the Democratic Party.

It was Democrats who invented triangulation. Republicans hated Clinton and Democrats abandoned him, so he had to go is own way.

[razorman]

70. With respect, by denying that the Republican win in 94 was in any way because of him,

you want to give him credit for good things that weren't. He didn't balance the budget. No president can do that. All budgets are generated in congress. The health care plan, though well-meant, was a complicated fiasco, very poorly handled in a PR sense. The normalization of relations with Vietnam did not cause much of a stir, and I don't believe it was much of a factor either way, although in retrospect, it was a good thing. The welfare reform bill was not his idea.
All of these things, combined with other Clinton initiatives, like, "Don't ask, don't tell", gave the R's enough leeway to bring in their so-called "Contract with America" and win control of congress. That, of course, stymied much of what President Clinton might have been able to accomplish from that point on. The Republicans took advantage of his personal difficulties later on, but we probably would have done the same if the shoe had been on the other foot. It is politics.
We have to remember, that as much as we here at DU might love the guy, not all of America felt the same. Certainly, he won reelection, but it was not a landslide. So, we should not let our admiration for someone blind us to their failures. That is what we accuse the Republican voters of doing by ignoring the Bush/Cheney debacle. We can be better than that.

[HardWorkingDem]

3. Yeah, and look where the Clenis got us...nt

nt

[billbuckhead]

12. For most Americans including the poorest, it was good times under Clinton

Everybody I know says they made more money then, even many Republicans will volunteer that.

[Lerkfish]

20. and times are worse under Bush...what's your point? are you saying Hillary

set economic policy, or engineered the dot.com bubble expansion (and eventual bursting)?
Hey, I liked the economy under clinton, but I NEVER at the time thought "wow, I"m glad Hillary is first lady so we can have this great economy".

[billbuckhead]

25. My point is that Dems are very bad at choosing and electing POTUS candidates

and many are pissing on our only real success story in 30 years. Obama is an empty suit with a big smile and flashly meaningless rhetoric when given the chance to memorize. Obama has never actually beat a real Republican challenger while the Clinton's are battle hardened and vetted.

[tabasco]

33. Alright then! We should stop listening to the people and just listen

to the Hillary supporters! Since the people are so bad at selecting candidates and all.

[Lerkfish]

38. you gonna keep moving the bar like that?

you suddenly switched from insisting being first lady is a powerful position and responsible for the economy to now bringing up supreme court selection.

are you saying Hillary made decisions on who was on the supreme court during her husband's term?

you're being a little hysterical, here, if so.

[focusfan]

52. At least I didn`t give it all to the oil and insurance companies

under Bill Clinton

[HardWorkingDem]

57. Oh, so are you saying...

it's okay to weaken a party, lose a majority and let the fools that came in afterward come in with unfettered power, so long as you make money?

[Lerkfish]

4. clinton(s)???

pathetic. Get over it, more primaries to come.

but if you keep this crap up, you do yourself and your candidate more harm than good. Can't you people get it? republican strategies don't work with democrats. That's the whole problem with the DLC.

[billbuckhead]

8. So Hillary had no part in Bill's success?

Remember they campaigned as a two for one?

[Lerkfish]

10. LOL!

as I said, republican strategies aren't going to work.

hey, Obama's not my first choice, but the clinton campaign is in major mistaken meltdown.

[BenDavid]

45. Excuse me, but if I am not mistaken she did get elected Senator

and yes the first two term democratic president since FDR.

[Lerkfish]

56. Hillary was not elected president for two terms, unless you also say

Laura Bush was elected president for two terms.

sheesh, you don't know when to stop backing a losing argument.

[jakem]

6. when "the clintons" are running, let me know...

i wont vote for "them" either.

[OHdem10]

7. I think Obama would admit beating Alan Keyes took no

effort.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

9. HRC does not equal Bill Clinton repeat does not equal Bill Clinton.

[billbuckhead]

14. Why?

They often present themselves as a team.

[Kahuna]

35. She does not have his charisma. PERIOD. I mean, Bill could

stand up and give you such a load of bull, and you knew it was bull and he knew you knew it was bull, but you loved him just the same. Not so with Hillary.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

37. Kerry/Edwards does not equal Edwards/Kerry. Is this hard?

:shrug:

[Yael]

11. One did. In a pre-Iraq world

[Mr_Monday]

15. Hillary Clinton is not Bill Clinton nt

[LostInAnomie]

16. Huh? I thought Al Gore was Bill's running mate.

:eyes:

[Uncle Joe]

55. Not only that, Al Gore won in 2000 and it was stolen,

but the corporatists, would have you believe otherwise.

[liberalnurse]

18. Exactly

Obama is just a rock star...like Britney Spears...lots of hype and promotion which gave GW bush his shallow victory ,twice ! I want someone who knows the job of President, has successfully passed legislation for Americans...I want Hillary only.

[Lerkfish]

21. "obama is just a rock star" man, you guys are grabbing at straws

I think I liked you better when you thought you were entitled to victory. In defeat, you're even more insufferable.

[davidwparker]

19. Gore won, as recounting the entire state of Florida showed. Kerry won too,

but didn't stick around to show that.

[SammyWinstonJack]

40. Some suffer from selective memory it seems. Or they don't believe that Gore and Kerry actually won.

:shrug:

[walldude]

48. Makes you wonder if the Clintons are the only Dems they will let win

We need a landslide.

[stray cat]

22. I like the Clintons - but aren't "they" also the only ones to get impeached

and lose congress to the repubs?

[billbuckhead]

30. Since they were the only ones to ever win in 30 years that's true

[Pastiche423]

82. Where are you getting 30 years?

The "Carters" won and were in office until 1981.

[alcibiades_mystery]

23. Are we voting for Bill again? I thought we weren't!

The reason Obama beat just Alan Keyes is simple: no serious Republican could manage to run against him (after Sex Club Ryan dropped out).

It's hardly a point in your favor that he was thought so unbeatable that nobody worth mentioning even tried! :rofl:

[TwilightGardener]

27. Their time is over. What worked in the 90's is failing now--people

know their tricks and their style. They're almost a caricature of themselves now. Out with the old, in with the new.

[pansypoo53219]

28. yeah, and kerry the VIETNAM VET

was gonna beat the WORST PREZNIT EVER. fuck that thinking.

[treestar]

29. Doesn't mean they are the only ones who can.

Frankly, I think a log could beat Huckabee.

[billbuckhead]

31. Huckabee is a very formidable candidate and would destroy Obama

Underestimate Republicans at our peril.

[emilyg]

32. Agree.

[LostInAnomie]

34. Geez, if Huck would beat Obama, just imagine what he would do to Hillary.

Or should I say "The Clinton's"? I mean, afterall, didn't Obama trounce them in Iowa?

[marmar]

66. Complete and total bullshit.....

Huckabee appeals to the Republican evangelical base, which propels him in primary states with lots of evangelicals, such as Iowa. Look at his poll numbers in NH...Not exactly glittering for a candidate coming off a big win in Iowa.
His appeal is extremely limited beyond that world and the Republican Party KNOWS IT....Why do you think they're so actively trying to knock him off?

[Rosemary2205]

39. Huckabee isn't just Huckabee - he's the whole RNC if he gets the nod.

On his own he's a lightweight - so was GW. With whatever latest incarnation of Rove they stick behind Huckabee, should he win, it will be like watching gators commit canablism.

[HughMoran]

41. Thanks for reminding us

:eyes:

[dpbrown]

43. Ross Perot beat the Republicans - Clinton was reelected because people sensed "fight" in him

Now the successor to the Clinton dynasty is falsely believing that we were all sold on the "third way" bullshit the DLC spouts.

[tritsofme]

49. That's an old Republican myth

Exit polls showed that Perot took otherwise Clinton and Bush supporters equally.

[dpbrown]

58. I doubt it

Clinton did what Jesse Ventura did.

Now he's an insider, too.

The Who were right.

:shrug:

[tritsofme]

77. Spread an old GOP lie all you want

But its not true.

[dpbrown]

79. Disrespect the reality of the triangulation method of winning elections all you want

It doesn't mean that Ross Perot didn't effectively cause G.H.W. Bush to lose the election.

[book_worm]

46. "The Clintons" are the "only" dems to beat the Reps in 30 years

Wow, tell that to all the Dems in congress and other offices! Oh, I guess you mean for president. As far as I know Bill is the only "Clinton" to win that office, so it's not the "Clintons". I also guess you mean 30 years from now rather than 30 years at the time Bill was elected. Also Dems did win in 2000 with Al Gore, but we won't get into how that was stolen. It isn't HRC bringing new people into the Dem party and firing people up it's Obama. Sorry but HRC is a relic, a thing of the past who can't be trusted even for her vaulted 'experience' which was to cave in to Bush and allow him to invade Iraq.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

47. Yes, and the more I see of politics, the more convinced I am that

Mondale and Dukakis were "sacrificial lambs," weak candidates deliberately put forth to "prove" that "leftists" (even though REAL leftists weren't fond of either one) can't win.

I'm also convinced that Gore could have won an unstealable majority if he hadn't kept essentially saying "Me too" to everything Bush said.

[donheld]

50. 4 terms as governor of a border state??????

since when?

[burythehatchet]

51. Wrong

[Blarch]

53. "Obama beat Alan Keyes"

Obama also beat Clinton in Iowa, how soon we forget.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

54. Gore beat the RePUKES. nt.

nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

59. Keyes was Obaba's oponent because every Republcian in Illinois was afraid to run against him

[Imagevision]

60. Of those 30 years, It's been Bush-Clinton-Bush totalling 19 years, had enough yet...?

[JVS]

61. Giuliani had cancer, not fear of HRC

[Thothmes]

62. Arkansas was not a border state.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

63. Oy vey! You've got to be kidding with this. The Clintons? BTW.... Gore WON!!!!!

As to Hillary scaring Giuliani. I think cancer scared him.

[Echo In Light]

64. As did Kerry

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

72. Yes! Kerry won too but wasn't Proved. Gore won when the votes were counted. That little

tidbit got lost by MSM because of 9/11.

[ThomWV]

65. Al Gore beat them in 2000 - just in case you forgot

[tanstaafl]

67. Jimmy Carter 1976 - 1980 Democratic President

Enough said

[La Lioness Priyanka]

69. in fairness bill and hrc are not the same person

[lateo]

71. Election fraud in 2000 and 2004 proves you wrong.

Nuff said.

[mod mom]

73. What about Gore and Kerry? It was the DLC leadership who remained silent about the election

fraud that occurred-they even deny Gore won in 200 and blame his "loss" on fighting for the people over the powerful:

I am convinced that the failure of the DLC to acknowledge Gore's win in 2000 (in fact they blame his "loss" on breaking with the DLC and becoming a populist-i'll post a link below) and their active role in keeping Kerry from challenging Ohio in 2004(thanks to Clinton ally James Carville (also posted below) was calculated as to allow a HRC run in '08. If either would have taken the office they won, then HRC and her corporate cronies would not have had a chance in 2008. Also look how they try to undermine Howard Dean. Anyway, here are some links:

FIRST..GORE BROKE WITH THE DLC TO BECOME A POPULIST:

Published on Sunday, August 20. 2000 in the Boston Globe
Thank You, Al Gore
by Robert Kuttner
A funny thing happened to Al Gore on the way to his surprisingly effective acceptance speech. He became a liberal.

The speech was as liberal as anything FDR or LBJ or Jesse Jackson or one of the Kennedys might have delivered. It was built around a commitment to fight for ordinary people, against large and powerful interests. This, of course, is precisely what made it effective.

The emotional heart of the speech, Gore's honoring of four ordinary American lives, did not just salute the struggles of workaday families, the way Ronald Reagan often did. It identified who was dishonoring their struggles - corporations. He singled out heartless HMOs who pressure a family to sacrifice a child; drug companies that force a pensioner to choose between food and medicine; corporate polluters; corporations that pay workers inadequate wages.

And he identified the solution: strong, reliable public Social Security; better Medicare; welfare reform that rewards work rather than punishing the needy; higher minimum wages; and more investment in public - not voucher - schools, so that working families don't have to send kids to crumbling classrooms.

What is the evil? Corporate power. What is the remedy? Effective government.

-snip
http://www.commondreams.org/views/082000-105.htm

SECOND, AFTER GORE'S WIN THEY BLAME HIS 'LOSS' ON BREAKING WITH THE DLC:

Strange Theory on Why Gore Lost



The so-called Democratic Leadership Council has decided that Al Gore should have acted more like a Republican in order to win the 2000 presidential electoral college vote in addition to his nationwide popular vote victory. This strange finding has drawn some attention, including coverage by the Associated Press and the Environmental News Service -- we have a few excerpts from their reports for you here.
Al Gore, the self-styled environmental candidate in the 2000 Presidential election, lost his bid for the White House because he campaigned on an outdated "populist" platform that was too liberal for most Americans, according to a new report drafted by the Democratic Leadership Council.

The 40-page report, titled "Why Gore Lost, And How Democrats Can Come Back," concludes that the Democratic Party must move towards the political right -- towards the Republicans -- if it wants to regain control of Congress in 2002 and the White House in 2004.

Al From, the DLC's founder and CEO, opened a freewheeling discussion forum by arguing that Democrat Al Gore made a huge tactical mistake by continually emphasizing that he would "fight for the people and not the powerful" as the nation's first president of the 21st Century.

-snip

http://www.progress.org/goredlc2.htm

AND FINALLY, CLINTON ALLY JAMES CARVILLE'S ROLE IN THE QUICK KERRY CONCESSION:

Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)


By M.J. Rosenberg | bio




On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

-snip

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

-snip

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

[Javaman]

74. That is of course of you totally ignore vote rigging.

If not, we would have had Gore in 2000 or Kerry in 2004.

[Marr]

76. Does she want to be judged on her own merits or not?

The argument seems to flip depending on what's most convenient at any given moment. You can say "the Clintons" beat the the GOP for POTUS, but scoff at tying Hillary Clinton to her husband's less popular policies.

You can say her gender shouldn't matter, but drop it the moment her gender could be used as an advantage ('wouldn't it be great to have a female president', or 'her critics are sexists').

[LittleClarkie]

78. Twelve years ago

I dare say a few things have changed since then.

[JCMach1]

81. Perfect if the repigs nominate keyes