This article is spot on...... http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/09/02/zelizer.republicans.center/index.html?hpt=hp_bn9 I'm not sure the GOP base will allow anyone to do what they need to do..... Times have changed so much with all of the vitriole and hot air.....so much so that no one on the right can even envision what a moderate is.
What G.H.W Bush could teach Republicans. He tried to be a moderate. He worked out an agreement with Democrats that included tax hikes and spending cuts. Of course they never kept up their half of the bargain. Bush was hoisted on his "no new taxes" petard and learned as did McCain that being a "moderate" Republicans means that no one likes you.
Clinton could teach Republicans what? Clinton never had a majority. He only got elected and reelected because H. Ross Perot siphoned away enough votes to cost the Republicans those elections. The majority of the American people voted against Clinton both times. Every budget that he proposed was tossed in the trash by the Republican Congress, then he took credit for having a balanced budget. Every policy decision was guided by his focus groups and polls... Bubba Clinton is the guy who made the Democratic Party what it is today: a political party that believes in absolutely nothing...
Ha! I forgot all about the stupid polls Clinton ran our country on, he didn't take a piss without a poll...
John Huntsman echoed those same feelings in the debate last night. The rest looked at him like he was from Mars.
Dave, If you didn't misuse statistics so much, I wouldn't believe you had an agenda... The 'popular vote' that so many Democrats hung their hat on and bitched about Bush not getting 50% of the American vote is comical... For your approval: 1996: Clinton 49.2% Dole 40.7% Perot 8.4% 1992: Clinton 43% Bush 37.5% Perot 18.9% 2000: Bush 47.9 Gore 48.4 Nader 2.7% Bush garnered more than 50% in 2004. What's interesting to me is that Democrats would openly laugh at you if you suggest that Perot cost Bush or Dole.. but they virtually hung and burned Ralph Nader (who is a man I actually respect a great deal) in effigy because he cost Gore...
2000 popular vote: Gore 48.38% Bush 47.87 % http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?f=0&year=2000 OH....and at a 25% popularity rating in Nov. of 2008 W's popular vote wouldn't have looked very popular if he were to have been in that election.... :wink:
The only thing that validates is that Clinton was one of only two Presidents in the history of our country to have been impeached.....obviously a political and national disaster of epic proportions for the Office of the President AND our nation, as a result. Yet, you and your ilk hold this buffoon up as a shining example of success, something to emulate and the standard by which all should be measured. You must be kidding me. It reminds of the kid trying to explain to Judge Judy where his rent money goes......it's patently absurd. Is it any wonder the Lib/Dems can't get out of their own way trying to manage anything?
Why did you repost essentially the same numbers I put up? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000 Was there a point to that? You point to approval ratings... Bubba wasn't very popular on the way out either.. So tell me, do popularity polls really equate to effective leadership? If you think that, well... you don't know many great leaders.
The only thing I could think of was how to get a BJ in the Oval Office during a meeting with the leader of a foreign govt. I will say though, that if I had to choose between BO and Slick Willy...give me Slick any day.