Home Main Forums 2018 Elections The Death of Clintonism

  • UnicornOnTheCob (803 posts)
    Profile photo of UnicornOnTheCob

    The Death of Clintonism

    The Death of Clintonism
    TODD S. PURDUM
    Politico

    Twenty-five years ago, Bill Clinton almost single-handedly repositioned the Democratic Party for electoral success, co-opting and defusing Republican talking points and moving the party toward the center on issues like welfare and a balanced budget, in the process becoming the first presidential nominee of his party since Franklin D. Roosevelt to win two consecutive terms. But even as he left office after the bitter 2000 recount, and George W. Bush returned the White House to Republican hands, there were questions about whether Clinton’s political philosophy would endure beyond his own tenure.

    What Bill and Hillary Clinton seemed to miss as they sought to burnish Bill’s legacy and build her a new one in this campaign was that the kind of “New Democrat” he’d once exemplified was now extinct, a victim first of Clinton’s own successes, and then of the economic and social dislocations of the globalism whose inevitability he foresaw when he predicted that Americans would one day “change jobs four or five times in their lifetimes!”

    Bill Clinton’s “Third Way” ideology was also undone by sheer geopolitical realities—there are almost no Blue Dog Democrats left after a generation of redistricting, primary challenges and electoral defeats in the South—and by Obama’s cooler, more cerebral style of politics, which he deployed to defeat Hillary Clinton in 2008 as a strikingly fresh face.

    By 2016, spurred by anger at Wall Street, and at Washington gridlock and business as usual, the Democratic Party had moved well to the left of the one Bill Clinton had inherited in 1992. And while Hillary Clinton recognized the change intellectually, she seemed unable to catch up to the practical realities of its political implications for her campaign. She embraced bold approaches on hot-button issues like immigration and gun control that would have been shocking for a Democrat in her husband’s day, and accepted what was arguably the most liberal Democratic Party platform in history, but that never seemed to be enough to satisfy younger voters, especially. “People thought she’d been conceived in Goldman Sachs’ trading desk,” says one veteran Clinton aide, noting the irony that this was millennial voters’ jaded view of a woman often seen in the 1990s as reflexively more liberal than her husband.

     

    OzoneTom, Passionate Progressive, Populist Prole and 9 othershippiechick, Koko, closeupready, WillyT, PADemD, xynthee, Live and Learn, GloriaMundi, djean111 like this
     

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

▼ Hide Reply Index
32 replies
  • 1 month ago #1
    • exindy (1303 posts)
      Profile photo of exindy Banned

      1. Crock'o.

      “Democratic Party had moved well to the left of the one Bill Clinton had inherited in 1992”

      No, it didn’t. The Democratic Party (big D) moved far to the right. The base that they used to represent didn’t go anywhere. They always were socially liberal. And then they found that their social liberalism was being destroyed by the corporatism and wealth inequality.

      Like indirectly removing the funding engine that made Social Security and Medicare work. And removing the regulatory checks that made quality of life so much better.

      Another BS establishment argument trying to convince us that Clinton was always right and that we are the stupids.

      Disclaimer: This post should in no way to be construed to be pro-Trump, nor should it be considered to be a support of his actions.
      • ramparta (162 posts)
        Profile photo of ramparta

        5. the party "leadership." esp elected leadership moved to the right

        on most matters that matter to most people.

        voters stopped following with predictable results – repubs are 3 votes in a bicameral state legislature away from a constitutional convention with equally predictable results.

        • Mom Cat (5347 posts)
          Profile photo of Mom Cat Donor

          7. The thought of a new constitutional convenation truly scares me. I have heard

          that Cenk’s Wolf Pac is actually supporting the idea of a new convention. Is that true?

               NEVER FORGET      BERNIE WON!          
          • ramparta (162 posts)
            Profile photo of ramparta

            13. i don't know about the wolf pac

            but the thought of delegates appointed by modern republicans to rubber stamp an alec constitution is truly dreadful.

            http://www.conventionofstates.com/newsblog

          • JimLane (836 posts)
            Profile photo of Jim Lane

            26. Yes, Wolf PAC is supporting this horrible idea

            From the Wikipedia article about Wolf PAC:

            Its strategy is to add a 28th amendment to the Constitution, thereby overturning multiple Supreme Court cases including Citizens United v. FEC and Buckley v. Valeo, which cumulatively have made it impossible to achieve Wolf PAC’s campaign finance goals through simple legislation. Wolf PAC believes that Congress is too corrupt to pass such an amendment itself, and therefore advocates a convention of the States, which is a procedure outlined in Article V of the Constitution. As of September 2016, five states have passed resolutions calling for such a convention, though not all states have used identical language in their convention call.

            Of the resolutions that have passed, some call for a convention “for the sole purpose” of addressing campaign finance.  The problem is that there has never been an Article V convention.  There’s no precedent for the assumption that its scope can be limited.  If a convention ever occurs, with the delegates picked by state legislatures (which are dominated by Republicans), it might well be free to propose any amendment it wanted to.  Any dispute about the legality of the procedure would ultimately be resolved by the Supreme Court, which, thanks to Trump’s win, will be in conservative hands for some years to come.

            I think Cenk is making a terrible mistake in supporting this plan.

            Amendments to overrule Supreme Court decisions on reproductive rights, marriage equality, civil liberties, etc. would probably fail, because the 13 most liberal states could block ratification.  My biggest concern is the Balanced Budget Amendment.  Even some Democrats in the state legislature might vote for such a thing.  They’d get to pose as guardians of fiscal integrity while foisting on Congress the task of approving the unpopular tax increases and spending cuts required for compliance.  In the ultimate irony, some of those state legislators could then run against incumbent Congressmembers by denouncing them for those unpopular votes.

            A federal Balanced Budget Amendment would be a policy catastrophe.

             

            • Mom Cat (5347 posts)
              Profile photo of Mom Cat Donor

              28. Thanks for the information, even though it confirms my deepest fears!

              I like the idea of a constitutional amendment to say that corporations are not people, bet to put our most precious rights up for a vote in this political climate would mean the end of democracy in the US.

                   NEVER FORGET      BERNIE WON!          
      • GZeusH (971 posts)
        Profile photo of GZeusH

        6. We can fix that sentence

        It stuck me as wrong too.  Democratic VOTERS had moved well to the left….     Now it works. The party, the Wall Street suck-up shills were the ones who moved far to the right.

        Policy:  The mistaken notion that bossy people have that they can influence other people's behavior through majority rule.
        • Fire with Fire (201 posts)
          Profile photo of Fire with Fire Donor

          30. Right and right

          Slick and the Third Way DLC manipulators were telling the truth when they said the GOP had an ideological advantage as of 1992.  The Reagan Democrats deserted us for many of the same reasons that the Hillary Whiners see today as some of them returned to the GOP and Trump this year — racism, religious bigotry, small mindedness, super-patriotism.  Although this is of course a grotesque over-simplification, there are indeed deplorable thoughts running around loose in this country.

          The irony of course is that Bill went after those votes and won.  Hillary and her weird supporters show every evidence of wanting those white people to be Republicans.

           

          If the election of 2016 were decided by only those eligible to vote in 1992, Trump would have won in a landslide as the country is much less white and the younger cohorts joining the electorate are FAR to the left of the Angry White Males who elected Reagan, Poppy and Shrub.

          Slick and his cadre of sharpies correctly assessed that 1960s style liberalism was still a loser as of then.  So they consciously made a play for Corporate Money, and the rest is history.  They became addicted to the cash flow and they owe their careers and their status to raising money from the erstwhile enemies of the Democratic Party.

           

          A lot of the voices on this board have trouble with ideas like this.  They want to say that Left Wing Politics could have won at any time in history.  That is nonsense.  History bumps and grinds, demographics are perpetually evolving and the zeitgeist never sits still.

          We are now 15 years into the post 9-11 night mare, and the erstwhile conservative electorate has experienced unvarnished conservatism — and the result is that the majority is now ready for Democratic Socialism and more.  That makes the betrayal of the the Party of Roosevelt so tragic and so disgusting.

          Bill and Hillary Clinton had one hell of a ride — from Arkansas to the White House and on to their Foundation, all based on saying about the Republicans, “If you can’t beat ’em, join  ’em.”  Well, they made out like bandits, didn’t they?

           

          Worked for a while.  No more.

           

      • nevereVereven (1801 posts)
        Profile photo of nevereVereven Donor

        23. Big steaming! nm

        A hologram of a magnifying glass will also function as a magnifying glass, but a hologram of Sherlock Holmes won't solve anything.  
    • closeupready (392 posts)
      Profile photo of closeupready Donor

      2. Right, 'veteran Clinton aide', because their fortune came from nowhere.

      Literally, after they left the White House “broke”.  :eyes:

      This ‘woe is me’ posturing – farcical.

      The Clintons and their acolytes get it.  They get that Americans are no longer chuckling with them about the financial sleights-of-hand they rubber-stamped; rather, they see how the Clintons and their insiders got filthy rich in the wake of, for example, Wall Street deregulation while working people simply lost their jobs, homes, health, pensions and every other feature of a middle-class life as a direct result.

      The opinions and views expressed herein are solely those of the author.
    • faultindicator (544 posts)
      Profile photo of faultindicator Donor

      3. Is this the crap they're going to pedal for the next 4 years?

      Sure, there will be some, maybe many, that will buy into the narrative that the dem party is further to the left than it has ever been, but do they really think sentient beings can accept the steaming shovel full presented here?

      A malfunction causes an FI (fault indicator) to light up on the dash. It flashes in code saying what to fix. Simple and straight forward. Just like this place - causes and solutions without the bullshit.
      • Koko (2089 posts)
        Profile photo of Koko Donor

        8. Another example of the "steaming shovel full" in this article:

        Purdham goes into contortions in this poorly written article. This is another example:  :puke:

        From the article:

        But Bill Clinton himself was far from an unalloyed asset in Hillary’s campaign this year. The rosy glow that had come to surround much of his post presidency, and his charitable foundation’s good works around the world, receded in the face of Trump’s relentless reminders of his personal and sexual misconduct in office, and his and his wife’s tendency toward legalistic corner-cutting—a point Sanders also drove home, even as he disavowed any interest in “her damn emails.”

        “I think a lot of the problem for Hillary this time was that though Bill has kind of sustained a hold on the public’s imagination, and has a kind of charismatic quality that endears him to people and overshadows even his derring-do with Monica Lewinsky, it’s a mixed story,” says historian Robert Dallek. “The fact that you had someone like Trump who is so totally inexperienced gave him a considerable advantage.”

        That advantage may have been a perverse one, given Trump’s own well-documented antediluvian conduct with women, but there is no arguing that Hillary’s campaign allowed her husband’s personal and policy legacy to be dragged back into the muck, at least in the short term.

        • faultindicator (544 posts)
          Profile photo of faultindicator Donor

          22. They can say nothing about the Clintons without praise; perverse as you said.

          From rosy glow to good works to the public’s imagination overshadowing his derring-do!!!? Some of these writers have to be rolling on the floor laughing as they think this stuff up. If it weren’t incredulous to the extent of tabloid fiction I would be downright mad.

          A malfunction causes an FI (fault indicator) to light up on the dash. It flashes in code saying what to fix. Simple and straight forward. Just like this place - causes and solutions without the bullshit.
    • bemildred (1687 posts)
      Profile photo of bemildred Donor

      4. That would be great, but I don't believe for a second they will give up.

      • Koko (2089 posts)
        Profile photo of Koko Donor

        9. I'm waiting for Trump

        to announce an appointment to a government position that he will offer to one, or both of them, that will work to his advantage politically. Maybe an Ambassadorship or head of a Task Force.

        They weren’t invited to his Third Wedding ceremony for nothing–there had to be some ongoing relationship.  Plus, the Clinton Foundation/Global Initiative has so much corruption and tentacles that have been covered up, that its hard not to suspect that there is overlap there with some of Trump’s close business buddies if not Trump himself.

        If not an official appointment for the Clintons, then Trump & Co. may find ways to use the CF/CGI to their own advantage which also will keep the Clinton’s busy and out of competition with his administration.

        Just my dark thoughts on the way the “PTB” tend to work things out to their own advantage.

        • OCMI (1144 posts)
          Profile photo of OCMI

          10. An ambassadorship to Libya for herself

          Sounds like a winner :D

          If you dislike Trump, you should vote for him so we can change his party from within. Yes, Hillary supporters, this is how ridiculous you sound.
          • bemildred (1687 posts)
            Profile photo of bemildred Donor

            12. I like the way you think too.

        • bemildred (1687 posts)
          Profile photo of bemildred Donor

          11. I like the way you think.

          I think Clinton might do well just to not get prosecuted, but we will see. Trump has the rep. for being vindictive, but I think he is actually flexible as well-cooked spaghetti, and the Clintonites are definitely trying to “attack” him, or “punish” him or something, so he might well try to buy them off.

          • Koko (2089 posts)
            Profile photo of Koko Donor

            14. Yep…it's all about "Bidness" in the end..

            And, we’ve got that Full On Businessman, now heading our Govt.

            The Clinton’s know all about “Bidness” too, as we well know.  The one hand washes the other in corruption.  And, he may have enough on them that he can play them and their connections to great advantage. We have to hope there is a “good side” to Trump that we haven’t been made aware of.   Not likely.

            What a mess.

            As you say:

            Trump has the rep. for being vindictive, but I think he is actually flexible as well-cooked spaghetti, and the Clintonites are definitely trying to “attack” him, or “punish” him or something, so he might well try to buy them off.

            • bemildred (1687 posts)
              Profile photo of bemildred Donor

              15. Well I do see some Trump-hagiography out there.

              The main thing I would hope for from Trump at this point is that he will prove pragmatic, and not the dumb vindictive dipshit which he is portrayed as, and thus act as a restraint on the people who got him elected.

              He isn’t my sort of guy, any more than say Putin, but I didn’t feel the need to do anything about it before he ran for President and won. I find it hard to be optimistic now, but Trump is just a small part of that lack. A symptom of the rot.

              It is more that I see little in our institutions that offers hope for a course correction, at best there will be less tugging at the wheel in the direction of the ditch, if you see what I mean.

              And  that is on the theory that Trump is not himself ideologically driven and a raving bigot, perhaps of some unfamiliar sort, which is unproven.

              On the other hand, in US politics, that sort of thing, raving bigots in politics, is not new.

              • Koko (2089 posts)
                Profile photo of Koko Donor

                16. Yes…

                When they own most of it….they become a target.  What will ALEC, KOCH’s, MIC, Mainstream Media Faux News and the rest of their ilk do now?   Up above someone posted about a  Right Wing “Constitutional Convention.”  They may get so drunk in a tizzy over their “new powers” that they self implode.

                I live in N.C. and this is a battle ground for what is to come given the Repub Gerrymandered takeover by totally crazy Repubs (some of them Koch/ALEC funded out of state, carpetbaggers, not native NC’linians).  There is push back from the courts….for now, but we shall have to wait and see who Trump appoints to the vacant Federal Judge positions and the Supreme Court to see how things turn out.  Still, the awakened citizens are pushing back with legal opposition to try to delay and eventually rout them.  We did manage to throw out our Repub Governor in a close to recount final tally..even though Trump won NC by a respectable margin.  So, hope is not yet lost.

                That old saying:  Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, comes to mind.  They might finally scare the hell out of enough people that what you say is exactly what will happen.  Given the craziness..I’d settle, too, for not ending up in the ditch if that’s the best we can do at this point.

                Quote from you:

                It is more that I see little in our institutions that offers hope for a course correction, at best there will be less tugging at the wheel in the direction of the ditch, if you see what I mean.

                • bemildred (1687 posts)
                  Profile photo of bemildred Donor

                  17. Exactly, these guys have no idea how to govern well.

                  And US Presidents tend to be well-paid sacrificial goats in the best of times, as Obama is finding out now. Trump will find that out soon too.

                  But you make a good point up there, much will depend on whether our oligarchs work things out or stay at war with each other.

                  I have been waiting since Raygun was elected and it became clear they were going to double down on the war-mongering for the day of accountability that is coming. Because they do a truly crappy job of running the country, our “leaders”, don’t they?

                  • FanBoy (5702 posts)
                    Profile photo of FanBoy

                    19. been waiting since raygun too and it just keeps getting worse in every way

                    it seems I will die befor eit gets better

                    and sometimes I don’t even believe as far as it will get better

                    • bemildred (1687 posts)
                      Profile photo of bemildred Donor

                      20. Yeah, that's it my friend, can we live long enough to see it?

                      • FanBoy (5702 posts)
                        Profile photo of FanBoy

                        21. it would make death a bit easier to think something good would survive

                        I start to understand even more the consequences of hopelessness as the root cause of social evils

          • MistaP (3700 posts)
            Profile photo of MistaP Donor

            25. OTOH attacking and punishing him just may well piss him off enough

            like how he iced the CIA using the Pentagon

            and as Koko vvvvv says he’s a BIDnessman–he doesn’t have to deal with the Clinton machine, their “stock” is worthless; their only assets are the teevee networks which never liked him anyway and Lenny Letter

            http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/ (Third Way = Bell Curve)
            • bemildred (1687 posts)
              Profile photo of bemildred Donor

              27. Well, the temptation to take them down must be there.

              And they aren’t helping. So you got me there, I can’t argue, and Trump the magnanimous does sound odd.

              I think I am a bit mystified by all this, if it was a book I wouldn’t believe it, it’s like an Ayn Rand novel.

              I think you put your fingr on the crux of the situation now, like KoKo, do they kiss and make up or is it war of the oligarchs?

              This is an interesting spin on it: http://www.jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/the-coup-against-trump-and-his-military-wall-street-defense/

    • FanBoy (5702 posts)
      Profile photo of FanBoy

      18. i flipped through the pictures — the one of the sax on arsenio reminded

      me of how weird I thought it was at the time — to see a presidential candidate acting like he was running for pop star

      it was the start of the routinizment of that kind of thing, I think

    • oldandhappy (2627 posts)
      Profile photo of oldandhappy Donor

      24. I experienced the party going way right.

      I felt the Tea Party took the whole country way to the right and the Dems jogged along.  I was unhappy with the Dems long before herself said ‘I’m a progressive’ and made me laugh and hoot and holler.

    • bigwillq (241 posts)
      Profile photo of bigwillq

      29. I am glad the Clintons are out of power

      and I hope it stays that way. Good riddance.

      “To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” -TR
      • NUGrrl (173 posts)
        Profile photo of NUGrrl

        31. There's always Chelsea to look forward to.

        I want to believe they have the good sense to cut their losses and just retire rich and unburdened but then I can’t help wonder if their practiced sense of entitlement would lead them to prod their scion to reclaim their tarnished legacy.

        If Chelsea announces  a candidacy for senator (of Martha’s Vineyard or some such) I will turn to my husband and say, “This is why the ancient Romans killed not just their rivals but the rival’s entire family.”

        Yes,  I'm Progressive. Yes, I'm pro-2A. Yes, I'm the loyal opposition. Yes, that's my tattoo.
        • Snort McDork (1409 posts)
          Profile photo of Snort McDork Donor

          32. I wish I could have a big campfire pit outside……

          …So I can burn these:

          And this:

          This too.

          Just an opportunity to have a campfire and burn some stuff would make me happy.