What if Clinton lost in 92?

[RobertFrancisK]

The more I think about Bill Clinton the more I despise him. His conservative record destroyed us as a nation party and he sold out or blew it on some of our key issues. So I got to thinking "what if he had lost in 92?" Here's what I think could've happened:
Bush I would have had a rapid decline in popularity as the economy continued to sour because he didn't feel he needed to do anything about it. This would have caused the Democrats to make sweeping gains in the house and senate, booting out Senators like Ashcroft for steady progressives and House members like the young Tom DeLay and Democrat governors would beat of any challengers, such as Ann Richards destroying the campaign of George W. Bush and ruining his career. After the tech-boom came into effect in 95, Congress would pass sweeping gun control and tax reform bills over the presidents veto.
In 1996, Bob Dole would be the Republicans' sacrificial lamb to veteran Senator Fritz Hollings. The administration would erase any talks of NAFTA, balance the budget as well as implementing a national healthcare plan and a welfare reform bill that provided valuable job training and free adult education to poor single mothers if they got out of the system 6 months after they finished school. The success of this administration as well as the courage and moral integrity of it brings liberalism to new heights.

Instead, we got a bad welfare reform bill, NAFTA, a huge defeat on healthcare, lost both houses, got a few moderate judges on the bench, the telecommunication act, and got a surpuls which wasn't used on anything and was set up to be wasted by the next administration, which was republican because Bill embarrassed the party by not keeping his zipper up for a fat slut.

ANyway, I think if Hillary runs, I hope she gets destroyed in the primaries, because the Clintons may get some good done here and there, but the bottom line is they don't care about anything but winning (Hillary too, as evidence: her war vote). We don't need someone slick that can con the public and press into liking them, but someone that will mkae the country better and have people like him for that.

[bahrbearian]

1. I agree on one point Clinton was a Conservative.

[AntiCoup2K4]

2. If Clinton lost in 1992?

None of us would be online, as 16 straight years of failed ReaganBush policies would have bankrupted this country, and we would probably all have been selling pencils out of tin cups on the streetcorner.

It's bad enough that after 8 years of unprecedented prosperity, the Idiot Son of an Asshole has tanked the economy even worse than his daddy.

[BayCityProgressive]

5. This is ridiculous

Clinton had to work within his means. There were many conservative Democrats in congress when he was elected and he couldn't do much afterwards either when the GOP controlled congress. Clinton passed a progressive budget with progressive taxation, created the Americorps, passed the Medical Leave Act and wanted there to be a portion stating you were paid while on leave but couldn't get it passed. He fought the ban on gays in the military and got don't ask don't tell which he probably honestly thought was better than nothing. Public sentiment was very much against gays at the time and I am gay myself and do not fault him for this. He tried passing a form of universal healthcare that he thought could be passed but the insurance companies spent a huge sum of money lobbying against it. Single payer care is not going to pass, you can't even get Dems together on it, we needed a compromise like Bill's to have ANY chance at all. He protected more of our environmental lands and announced a gay pride month. I think we did need some welfare reforms even though I think many fo the reforms were wrong headed. If Clinton hadn't passed welfare reform he would have lost re-election to Dole who would have been far worse. Why bash a two term Dem preisdent? I had plenty of differences with him but why do we always have to help the Right by bashing our own 2 term president? He also stopped a lot of the most right wing legislation from passing.

[Parche]

3. Clinton was great

And he still is

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. Fritz Hollings In 96

Please

[LeftPeopleFinishFirst]

6. I think Clinton was smart.

He did know how to play the political game and he did it well. However, I believe that he did a lot of good for our country in his term. Had we had another four years of the Reagan-Bush machine, we'd be economically worse off than we are now. Clinton, while he did back down on several issues, at least knew what he was doing most of the time. I'd take that over another four years of Bush any day of the week. I think Clinton was working with what he had. If you can recall, there were many conservative Dems and conservatives during Clinton's term, which made it incredibly hard for things to be passed that were going to be very liberal. When you have a very moderate to non-liberal House and Senate, it is very hard to pass the more liberal bills and such.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. And he gave us Ginsburg and Breyer

not Clarence Thomas...


Nuff said....

[tom_paine]

8. Clinton's political brilliance was addressing the symptoms, not the diseas

Now that the disease of Goebbels v2.0, which was injected and has infected the Old American Republic to near death, is now so much further along, only now does his brilliance seem like a retrospective mistake.

But very few people recognized the VRWC's existance or it's adherence to time-tested Nazi-like propaganda strategies. And even if people could put it all together, the Denial Mechanism would have kicked in, making 1 + 1 = 3, thus insulating the person from The Awful Truth.

Had the Old American Republic not been under seige and being gnawed to death from within (at it's weakest links in the checks & balances) for DECADES by the Busheviks, and the "changes in the playing field" been legitimate, Clinton's brilliance would still be untarnished.

But this was not the result of any natural pendulum swing, but of a billion-dollar Goebbels v2.0 Propaganda Program on all levels of government and media, right down to the College Repukes who write up their lying blast e-mails that are surprisingly effective...

And so the disease marched on and worsened. The Attempted Coup of 1998 and everything that preceded it was probably (secondarily at least) to keep him/them so off balance and harried that their was no time to analyze the assault on America, which is now Amerika.

Clinton was indeed a Left-Centrist, more centrist than leftist (my prefrred type of candidate, personally), but the Goebbels v2.0 had taken such hold and root unchallenged that he was successfully painted as un Ultra-Leftist.

Orwellian madness.

So I think the verdict on Clinton is mixed. He won by seeing the trees and navigating the course as it was then, but failed to notice the forest being rearranged beneath his feet.

I think, had Clinton lost in '92, that Bush's the Smarter's second term would have been almost identical to Emperor Smirky's First term, including 9-11.

By now, they'd already be well into the roundups or whatever horrors Bushevik Totalitarianism will bring us between now and the reign of Emperor Jeb.

[Sterling]

9. 4 more years of Bush 1 and 9-11 would have been 8 years early.

Clinton was a speedbump on the road of the NWO.