Instead of declaring "Clintonism" dead...

[TreeStarsForever]

Instead of declaring “Clintonism” dead, Americans should remember how much compromise, corporation, and broad-based prosperity occurred during the 1990s when two pragmatists (and policy wonks) occupied the White House. Minimum wage was up 20%! We had a budget surplus and 7 million Americans were lifted from poverty.

Granted, the '90s weren’t progressive compared to today’s standard. However, we must remember — the Clintons were a breathe of fresh air after the “Reagan Revolution.” If not for Bill Clinton rebranding the Democratic Party, we would have been stuck with another 4 disastrous years of Bush Senior continuing Reaganomics.

We were headed for a 4th Republican term until Bill and Hillary showed up — the first Presidential couple willing to even meet with LGBT groups and discuss funding HIV/AIDS research. Something very radical for that era.

During the ‘90s, Hillary helped create the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP —8.9 million children insured) and was instrumental in all of Bill’s policy decisions. Many said Hillary was the one who actually ran the White House during the prosperous 1990s.

Personally, I think if Hillary ran on the *FULL* record of the 1990s, she’d win in 2020:

—Surplus
—22 million new jobs
—Family and Medical Leave Act
—4-balanced budgets due to the superb compromising ability of Bill Clinton
—7 million fewer Americans living in poverty
—Minimum wage up 20%
—Assault Weapons Ban
—Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act
—Campaign Against Teen Pregnancy: all-time low abortion rates
—Office on Violence Against Women
—Violence Against Women Act
—Children’s Health Insurance Program: 8.9 million children insured
—Incomes rising at all income levels

Debunking criticisms of the 1990s:

—NAFTA was bipartisan and first negotiated and put together by Bush Senior (Bill oversaw the implementation of NAFTA due to denying Bush a second term and 22 million new jobs were still created during the ‘90s despite NAFTA. Minimum wage was up 20%)
—The ‘94 crime bill was a bipartisan bill that even Bernie Sanders voted for. The Congressional black caucus also supported it at the time. Hindsight is 20/20. While working for the Children’s Defense Fund, Hillary represented African American juveniles placed in adult prisons.
—Welfare reform was due to 6 years of a GOP dominated Congress.
—Repealing Glass-Steagall had nothing to do with the ‘07 crash according to fact-checking websites — look it up! Oh and how about blaming George Bush for the recession instead of blaming a Democrat that left us a budget surplus.

Too bad so many Americans forgot about the net-positive record of the 1990s and drank the anti-Clinton kool-aid. The right-wing machine has been smearing Bill and Hillary for decades. Truly a “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

To be honest, we could really use two extremely intelligent pragmatists in the White House to clean up Trump’s mess. “Compromise” is not a dirty word and leads to actual progress. Hyper-partisanship on both sides leads to zero progress.

When people speak ill of President Bill Clinton, I think they have forgotten that he was a true pragmatist that was willing to compromise for the sake of progress. That is exactly the kind of person I want as President. Not someone like Bernie who would forfeit progress for purity.

Oh and never forget the truth about the Clinton Foundation: 11.5 million people treated for HIV/AIDS and a higher charity rating than the Red Cross.

We could use a pragmatist who is willing to compromise. Polarization on both the far-left and the far-right will destroy our country.

So let us remember our last great era — the pragmatic 1990s. And never stop recognizing the continued good work the Clintons are doing for the world with the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary — run on 1990s nostalgia (so much archival footage) and win in 2020 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

[Control-Z]

1. Yes. I agree.

Just yes.

[marylandblue]

2. It's a very different time now, none of those things could happen today

No matter how much we compromise. Our next President has to be a visionary, someone who can push through the logjam.

[JI7]

3. it helps to have a congress . there isn't going to be anyone who is better than Obama when it comes

to public appeal and just a political talent .

[marylandblue]

4. Then we are in trouble. Obama has public appeal, but his political skills are not so good

In particular, he did not play enough hardball. He tried to make compromises when there was nobody to compromise with.

I'm still waiting for our generation's FDR. I hope we have one.

[JI7]

5. what political skills would have helped? republicans controlled congress so he had to try

to compromise . even a congress willing to work would compromise because that's how things always work when you have a different party. even within party there is always compromise.

[marylandblue]

8. No compromise was possible

so he shoud have pushed through hard and early during the 2009 crisis, like FDR did. That was his best chance and he did do a lot, but not enough, and people didn't understand what he did, so there was a backlash and he got no credit.

Also, when the tax cuts were about expire in 2012, he did make a deal but not a good one, he should have held out for a better deal, or just let them expire.

He should have gone more populist. He was always cool and in control, so Democrats got complacent. He should have stirred us to call Congress, support his program, just like we are doing now, with negative inspiration from Trump.

Next Democrat now has a movement ready for him or her, so it will be easier to do what I wish Obama could have.

[JI7]

16. FDR had a congress

[marylandblue]

17. Your missing the point

FDR had a comprehensive plan with a name for his plan, a timeline and a clear explanation. First to make effective use of radio. Obama had a plan, but no name and wasn't aggressive.

Maybe Reagan is a better example. He too had a comprehensive plan, a clear name, he was aggressive and a name for his plan. He was also the first to make effective use of television for governing. He had a Democratic congress. He took advantage of divisions among the Democrats in the wake of Carter's loss.

Obama was the first to make effective use of the internet for fundraising, but not for governing. He could have but he didn't think of it. Trump did. Obama did not take advantage of Republican divisions. Some other Presidents did. He didn't take full advantage.of the powers of his office to bend Congress to his will. Obama is just not that aggressive.

That's what we need for a truly transformational president. The person we need in 2020 has to be aggressive. Real aggressive. And use social media the way Trump does.

[JI7]

18. no. I'm not missing anything. makeup and control of congress makes a huge difference

[marylandblue]

19. Of course it does and I never said any different

So yes, you are missing the point, which is simply that he should have been more aggressive, particularly in his first 2 years, when he did have control of Congress.

[JI7]

20. he turned the economy around. he did what he could

the rest just ignores the reality in this country.

[marylandblue]

21. So he was perfect? He could not have done anything different?

Perfect messaging, perfect timing, perfect persona, perfectly written laws, nothing could have been improved upon? And not only that, nobody will ever do any better than Clinton or Obama, so let's go with a Clinton again?

[JI7]

22. it's not obama that was the problem.

[marylandblue]

24. No but we thought he was the solution.

Unfortunately, he wasn't. I think the next Democratic President will be. But, if so, nobody like me will accuse that person of being too timid.

[JI7]

25. the solution is a congress the president can work with

this isn't a dictatorship.

[George II]

57. He had very large majorities in the Senate (largest was 75-21) and House (largest was 333-102).....

....throughout his entire 12+ years in office.

On the other hand, Obama a decent majority in the Senate in his first two years (56/58-40/42), razor thin majorities the next four years, and minority in his last two years. In the House he had a majority in only the first two years, then low minorities in his last six years (best was 201-234, worst was 188-247)

I don't see how anyone can compare Obama to FDR based on the Congresses they each had.

[karynnj]

12. His political skills were as good as they get

Remember, he was a very junior Senator and African American and he won the nomination against Hillary Clinton, the favorite of the Democratic establishment that had laid the ground work for her being seen as a potential president as long ago as 1992! Not to mention, she had as her top surrogate - her husband, the Democrat with by far the strongest voice. That reflects enormous political skill. He was given the key note speech by John Kerry, because after seeing him and doing a joint event in Illinois at the reccomendation of a man who supported both of them because Kerry was blown away by his potential ... and he did not disappoint.

Don't buy the media led common wisdom on "hardball". He did reach out to the Republicans and wanted their support on the healthcare bill and the stmulus package needed to keep the economy from going off the cliff. There are many public accounts that the Republican establishment made an unprecedented decision - at the point the economy was near collapse - that they would not cooperate on anything! If anything, Democrats - not Obama himself - should have made a stronger case that this was what they were doing and - in reality - it was unpatriotic. They cared more about party than country. They also needed to quickly immediately dispute that they gave Republicans no voice on the ACA. In fact, Senator Baucus, chair of Finance, spent about 4 precious months working with a group of Republicans - including Hatch and Snowe, who had actually sponsored plans similar to what they were working on. In the committee vote, Snowe actually voted FOR it saying she did not want to be on the wrong side of history ... a place she ended up in when under pressure she voted against ACA on the floor of the Senate. (Had she held true to her own values - the election of Scott Brown would not have ended the possibility of getting 60 votes for a conference bill.)

As to FDR, he was more progressive -- because he was responding to a catastrophe and tried everything his team thought possible. However, he had 64 Senate seats and 73% of the House when he was voted in. That rose to about 80% in both houses. Had Obama had those numbers, we would have had a better ACA, a climate change bill (one did pass the House and they came close too 60 votes in the Senate before Lindsey Graham bailed, likely an infrastructure bank bill to fund infrastructure creation as well as other things for which legislation was needed.)

Here is 538 analysis on that comparision - https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/obamas-no-fdr-nor-does-he-have-fdrs/

[marylandblue]

14. Obama made good speeches and had some good ideas

some of which he managed to get through. "Hardball" is where people like Olympia Snowe get "offers they can't refuse." And we never hear about those deals. LBJ was like that.

Obama was too nice to do that. And too cerebral.

I like Obama. It was good he managed to do as much as he did. But McConnell steamrollered him. McConnell played hardball. His caucus is afraid of him in ways they were never afraid of Obama.

Don't confuse a good idea with a sharp elbow.

Why do you think a "mob" was banging on the doors of the Senate? Because cool, calm and credible didn't work.

[karynnj]

15. LBJ also had a MUCH bigger majority party

It was also a time when the majority leader (and minority leader) had much more latitude to "sweeten deals" with earmarks that give the legislator something for his/her district. Those were - for the most part - made temporailly illegal in 2011. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earmark_(politics) )

A better comparison would be Obama with Bill Clinton, who no one accuses of not being willing to play hardball. He absolutely failed, with a less radical Republican party, to get comprehensive health care done. Kennedy and Hatch did get SCHIP passed and Clinton included it in the budget.

Not to mention, when we lost the House, we lost the ability to lead via legislation on many things as budget bills must start in the House. When we lost the Senate, confirmation of judges, cabinet officials, etc. That did NOT stop Obama from having accomplishments - including two that were major.

The Iran nuclear deal prevented a war with a larger more homogeneous country than Iraq. It is true that Trump pulled the US out .. and will soon have us in violation when we raise the sanctions related to it. Still, the rest of the world - including Iran are trying to make it work. What may have been irrevocably lost by Trump is the possibility of using diplomacy to end other Iranian actions. Still, war there is NOW - in spite of Netanyahu, MBS, and Trump - less likely now than it was in 2013 when Obama put his political capital on the line and Senator Kerry worked for this - head, heart and gut.

The second is that even though Trump has pulled us out of the Paris Climate Accord, not one country followed. Kerry had asked Obama when speaking of taking the SoS job if he could lead on the enviroment like Hillary did on issues of women and children. It was Kerry who used his long involvement with other countries at earlier meetings to get thethe US/China agreement, got some other third world country on board at the Lima conference. The design of countries making pledges was Kerry's.

Another accomplishment is that the US led the very successful international effort to stop the spread of ebola -- while the Republicans did not but generate fear that it could come here. In fact - it likely would have. We live in a global world - which was one reason why it was important to contain the epidemic quickly.

Another was that it was the Obama administration that built the coalition and planned how to end the state that ISIS declared. Trump - of course - claimed he was the one responsible, but his role might end up being failing the nation building and things like demining that had been a part of the effort under Obama as land was reclaimed.

[marylandblue]

23. I am not taking away from his accomplishments

I just think there were things he could have done better. Have we sainted him already?

[TreeStarsForever]

27. I wish it had been Hillary in '08

With Obama as VP. He would have learned from the master. Sadly, dung his first two years he was naive.

[question everything]

29. Agree.

He was not familiar with the way Washington was operating and listened to some wrong advice.

[marylandblue]

42. Thank you.

[Cha]

31. Give Me A Break.. ".. Sainted" President Obama?! Obama

is not the one being "sainted" around here.

[marylandblue]

43. Then accept he is subject to criticism

[Cha]

44. Anyone can say what they want about President

Obama.. That doesn't mean it has validity.

[marylandblue]

46. Yes, but the responses don't seem to address my actual criticisms

Or declare he couldn't have done any better. If he isn't perfect, he could have done something better and it would be something for future Democrats to think about.

[George II]

56. In his first year, FDR had a 59-60 seat majority in the Senate of 96 seats, and in the House...

....with 430-434 seats (varying) he never had less than 308 Democratic seats. The majorities may have been higher in subsequent years, I didn't check it.

Obama, on the other hand started with 55 seats in the Senate and 51 after 2010, started with 256 and 193 after 2010.

Like night and day.

[BannonsLiver]

35. You live in a fantasyland

Tell me, what’s life like in the big rock candy mountains where you have all the answers? The revisionist twaddle you’re excreting here is vile.

[marylandblue]

41. There is no need to insult me

I did not insult anybody. I did not insult Obama. I stated my opinion. That's all. Sorry if you don't like it.

[Cha]

47. Thank You!

[betsuni]

49. +1

[betsuni]

45. "Obama made good speeches"

[Cha]

48. Yeah, who does that sound like?

[betsuni]

50. I know. Disgusting.

[Cha]

51. The whole thing is disgusting.

[marylandblue]

52. The opinion is my own and any resemblance to someone else's opinion is coincidental

I am sorry if you don't like it. Constructive criticism of Democrats is allowed on DU. He could have done some things better. But seems a problem to identify what those things might be so we can learn from them.

[Cha]

30. President Obama got us out of the bush/cheney

Economic Ditch.. so many conveniently forget.

President Obama got us ACA/OK ON PRE-Existing Conditions. A good foundation to build on.

The 2010 and 2014 Midterms is when the "progressives" sat home and stomped their feet to teach President Obama a lesson. They're just soooo "progressive".

Oh they taught him alright.. and paved the way for the teabagger takeover and freedom G.D. causus.. and not being able to get Merrick Garland confirmed for one thing.

I appreciate FDR/Social Security.. but he got us Japanese Interment Camps and the New Deal wasn't so good for African Americans.

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=q6LOW5f4Load8APR-Ib4CA&q=the+new+deal+wasn%27t+so+good+for+African+americans&btnK=Google+Search&oq=the+new+deal+wasn%27t+so+good+for+African+americans&gs_l=psy-ab.3...4348.18064..19379...2.0..0.364.6793.0j50j0j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0j0i131j0i10j0i13j0i13i30j0i22i30j33i22i29i30j33i10j33i299j33i160.YVQs6A9amJA

[David__77]

6. Lots of people could get run over by "compromise buses."

I do not think the Democratic Party should adopt the agenda of the death penalty, NAFTA, and financial deregulation.

[Hortensis]

7. Hillary's very much alive, and her agenda IS the Democratic Party's.

No doubt there'll be more clean-up needed, and there's the little matter of our emptied treasury, but we still have a long list of exciting things to get to. We're in no worse shape than we were when the Great Depression gave rise to the greatest progressive advances in history.

[marylandblue]

9. Well I hope we get a chance to do them, but in some ways we are in a worse position

We didn't have a fascist in the White House.

But Democratic gain 1930 prefigured the resounding victory.of 1932. Can happen again.

[Hortensis]

13. Scary times.

Right now Trump's followers are obediently "frightened" of us. They need to become genuinely scared of him.

[Joe941]

10. There is quite a bit of speculation she runs again in 2020.

[TreeStarsForever]

26. It would be the ULTIMATE re-match...!!!

Without Russia and Comey, I say she wins. Easily.

She'd destroy him during the debates yet again.

[BannonsLiver]

36. There's literally been almost no speculation she runs again

[Joe941]

53. Oh...? You are just plain wrong.

Here are a few:
https://nypost.com/2018/10/20/count-on-hillary-clinton-running-again-in-2020/
https://theweek.com/articles/801606/how-hillary-clinton-could-win-2020
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/hillary-clinton-is-running-for-president-again-214766

A google search will produce a lot more too.

[BannonsLiver]

54. Three links?

[Joe941]

55. how many more do you want?

[WeekiWater]

11. Clintons last campaign platform is what most leftists are running on today.

Clinton deserves a thank you for being so bold.

And those dredging up some of the negative aspects of her husband are little more than Trump voters. Outside of that, their cherry picking makes no sense.

[joshcryer]

33. Her platform was the most progressive in history.

And not because of pressure. In spite of it. In spite of being left in the cold as the purist left derided and shamed her with right wing propaganda. It's a fucking travesty. A daily one. We see every morning when this inept and cruel administration wakes up.

[R B Garr]

38. Thank you, great post. You are exactly right about how the RW

propaganda was used against her by the purists. That’s why Russia/RWers helped Sanders. It is a travesty.

[lunamagica]

28. K&R. Thank you so much for starting this thread, TSF

I think people need to be reminded how much good the Clinton presidency did.

[TreeStarsForever]

34. So sad how soon people forget...

[R B Garr]

37. Amen. And they left us with a surplus and Gore, but

that wasn’t good enough either. Instead we got Bush’s war and Trump’s Supreme Court, which is gone now for decades. So disgusting.

[joshcryer]

32. The irony is that this leftist purity crap...

...has led to us having to elect another moderate, yet again.

No, a far left candidate cannot and will not win against Trump.

[R B Garr]

39. Excellent post, and thanks for these reminders. Bill Clinton was

the first Democrat to nominate a Supreme Court Justice in 25 years.

What a shame that self-serving candidates couldn’t bring themselves to acknowledge the accomplishments of the 90’s. Shameful.

[oasis]

40. Hillary and Bill served America well. nt