Re: Why Do the Republicans Hate the Clintons so Much?


"mg" <mgkelson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0a016083-c043-49bb-a468-90c2b48910a6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 4, 11:44 am, "John Galt" <whoisjohng...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Islander" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:HsCdnYt2vvJRxTranZ2dnUVZ_rGhnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx







mg wrote:
I've given some thought to this and I can only come up with two
significant reasons:

1. They were very popular and even maintained that popularity after
Bill Clinton was impeached.

2. Hillary's health care proposal.

Here is my theory:

Bill Clinton represented a serious threat to the Reagan "reduce taxes,
borrow and spend, trickle down" theory of economics. I still think
that
Perot deserves the credit for finally bringing this to the attention of
the American public, but Clinton got the message and ran with it. The
Republicans were far from defeated, however, as Gingrich proved in the
midterm elections, but the Republicans were left with the dubious
argument
that the prosperity of the Clinton years was only possible because of a
Republican Congress.

The roots of the animosity between the parties goes back to the Vietnam
war and the deep divisions in the American political scene in the
aftermath. Nixon, in his corruption, put off the worst of this until
Reagan could rebuild the coalition of interest groups that opposed
liberal
ideals. The Reagan era also saw the emergence of right wing think
tanks
that helped to build an energetic right wing. Likewise, the religious
right found a willing advocate in Reagan and their influence
strengthened.

So, Clinton was a serious threat and had to be dealt with.
Unfortunately,
like many leaders before him, he couldn't resist the ladies. He was
attacked for his indiscretions while the real target was his liberal
values. Both he and his ideals suffered as a consequence.

The message in all this is that we should never underestimate the power
of
the right. Bush has damaged the Republican party, but there is a core
strength that still exists and has a continuing influence in
Washington.
We need to be continually aware of this and in the new administration
be
very careful to avoid extremes of the left that might be used to
rebuild
the right.

There are other factors:

As you've likely noticed, there is a very large percentage of Americans
who
make political decisions based on issues of character. It's well known,
as
you mention, that this is not an area that Clinton scores highly in, and
this was well-known prior to and during the 1992 election. Supporters
discounted the womanizing and draft stories, people who were not
supporters
listened.

Also, there is also the matter of visceral reaction. So much has been
written about his "charisma" (which is a visceral reaction) people tend
to
forget that others reactly oppositely to such personal characteristics.
There are a lot of people who simply just can't look at the man. I'm one
of
them, and so is my wife. His face pops up on the TV, I reach for the
remote.
Reflex. (I do the same with Bush, but for different reasons.)

So, to conclude, I'd say that there are people who just intensly dislike
him, either for character reasons or for personality reasons, and these
people never really got so far down the road with him so far as to think
about policy matters. He was already disqualified as a candidate before
any
thought of that whatsoever.

JG

What about Hillary Clinton? She was actually a victim of the
womanizing yet the right wing's hate for her seems to be just as
intense as their hate for Bill Clinton, if not even more so.

I couldn't say as precisely. She gets a lot of anger-by-association, I
suppose, but unlike Bill, she's seen as an ideological leftist by many.

JG


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Awesome
    ... the filth of the Clinton regime, I would have voted for a monkey. ... a country where the vast majority of the populace are total slut horndogs who ... politician, stop expecting our elected leaders to be saints, and move on. ... Bush, for totally different reasons. ...
    (rec.music.progressive)
  • Re: Why Do the Republicans Hate the Clintons so Much?
    ... >> Bill Clinton was impeached. ... but the Republicans were left with the dubious> argument ... (I do the same with Bush, but for different reasons.) ... It seems to me that since the Republicans have not eliminated any of the social programs or spending programs that the Democrats are famous for and in fact increased Medicare more than any other program in the history of this country then it means that the Republicans are guilty of fiscal irresponsibility in the sense that they cut taxes now...while increasing spending and the size of government knowing full well that someone down the road is going to have to raise taxes to pay for it. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Why Do the Republicans Hate the Clintons so Much?
    ... Bill Clinton was impeached. ... Republicans were far from defeated, however, as Gingrich proved in the ... (I do the same with Bush, but for different reasons.) ... intense as their hate for Bill Clinton, ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Why Do the Republicans Hate the Clintons so Much?
    ... Bill Clinton was impeached. ... Bill Clinton represented a serious threat to the Reagan "reduce taxes, ... Republicans were far from defeated, however, as Gingrich proved in the ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Why Do the Republicans Hate the Clintons so Much?
    ... Bill Clinton was impeached. ... but the Republicans were left with the dubious ... (I do the same with Bush, but for different reasons.) ... irresponsibility in the sense that they cut taxes now...while increasing ...
    (soc.retirement)