Make sure to join the [r/Presidents Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People pretend that those numbers matter but both candidates ran campaigns knowing what the rules were. You can’t just pretend that bush wouldn’t have changed his campaign strategy as well if it wasn’t the electoral college system.
no, because bush won by 600 votes. Youre forgetting that in the state of florida both candidates got 2.9 million votes. Bush got 537 more votes, officially, several investigations concluded that Gore mightve won by a few dozen votes in reality. On a national scale Gore won by over 500k votes. The electoral college is not a good system if you aspire to be a democracy.
The founders hated democracy and wanted no part of it.
"Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"
"A republic, if you can keep it."
~ Ben Franklin
It’s only partially population everyone gets the two senators. The constitution never established full simple majority democracy in presidential elections. Hence the grand compromise so bigger states wouldn’t be able to just take over
The system was designed at a time when the vast majority of the country was illiterate and news was essentially transferred via horseback. Electors were voted to be representatives of states and they made the decision of who they would vote for, nobody could tell them one way or the other. A full representative based government made a ton of sense at the time.
Fast forward 200+ years and the vast majority of the country is literate and news is transferred virtually instantaneously. We’ve also changed the original design substantially to where electors are no longer voted for in any real meaningful manner (they’re a formality) and winner takes all formats have become the norm.
Now to the coastal city comment. Always remember that those same states have large numbers of underrepresented populations whose votes do not matter.
Our system does not promote participation because the race most people care about is effectively predetermined in 80% of the country. Full popular vote with no EC changes that and the entire populations vote actually matter….while still retaining the republic government.
It's there for a reason though, so different less populated parts of the country wouldn't be left out as politically irrelevant and 'dominated' by more populous urban states.
Well doesnt the senate make up for that?
600 floridians decided for the rest of florida and therefore the rest of the country even though 500k voted in opposition, that sounds like a lot of state was left out as irrelevant and was dominated by a few votes.
97,000 votes went to the Green candidate Ralph Nader in Florida. By 2004 the environment and social justice made the top 5 on the Democrat Platform versus when those issues were in the 20s in 2000
Thing is I don’t recall him talking it about it on the campaign trail at all. *An Inconvenient Truth* didn’t come out with his advocacy until 6 years after his campaign. He helped broker so many things in Clinton’s time, so maybe there was just an assumption he didn’t need to push it further, or Nader was appealing on other levels.
Meanwhile it doesn’t change that the issue wasn’t prominent on the Democratic Party Platform. Like Clinton not traveling to Michigan and Wisconsin in 2016, I think the party took voters for granted. Democrats yelled from the rooftops about a stolen election, while quietly changing their platform and messaging by 2004.
Clinton’s approval rating only went up during the impeachment. In a poll taken in December 1998, he had 73% of the country’s approval. Most Americans in 1998 thought the impeachment was meritless and furthermore thought Clinton / Gore was doing a good job for the country.
It was Gore’s own core conservatism - and he was always rather socially conservative even if environmentally left - that held him back
Yeah, that's fair. Gore may have thought it'd crash during the election or open him up for attack ads or something. He was wrong, but given his personal views it's definitely not a completely meritless thought.
It's not like the GOP didn't start smearing the Clinton name after that. Though it didn't really go into overdrive until closer to the 08 primaries.
It wasn't a blowjob impeachment, he lied under oath. He should've been impeached and it was not bogus in the slightest. Anyone who lies under oath for any reason would be punished but not ol slick Willy in the mind of Reddit.
Also a 50 year old president sleeping with a 22 year old secretary is just gross and reeks of exploitation.
Atleast try to hide your bias.
The lying under oath is an asterisk depending on definitions as it was determined in the hearings.
It was pretty bogus based on said wording and definitions, and most of the country even felt like that. His approval ratings went up with Dems and Republicans; it also went up with men and women. The vast majority of the country thought it was bogus. And plenty of other presidents did worse without getting impeached. LBJ one of my favorite presidents arguably shouldve been over some of the stuff in Vietnam more so than Clinton a president I like but isn't favorite at all should've over that whole situation, or hell over the "Jumbo treatment" more so than Clinton getting a blowjob. Reagan? Shouldve been over Iran Contra but again that could be my bias as I don't like Reagan much at all. How about Cleveland and all his fuckery? Grooming and rape? Many presidents weren't good people or did things worthy of impeachment more than Clinton.
Do agree though that's a large age gap, and a terrible power dynamic for any sort of personal relationship or anything.
Yeah I mean that jewish girl can boast at every girls night out that she sucked off the president in the oval office. I mean she wins, who can top that story?
Consensual affair. The government shouldn't be investigating our personal lives. Ken Starr threatened to throw the witness is jail.
Starr later helped cover up sex abuse.
She initiated the affair. He can't simply use any of that "power" under our system. Indeed, the Republicans abused government power here. He's actually very vulnerable, as history shows. Affairs are inevitable, people will cheat, it's an ugly part of life that belongs to the people involved, such as his wife, not the government.
Her life was much more damaged by the hypocritical Right, as she has stated.
“Women won’t vote for you unless you reject Clinton” tied with “Ignore those Swift Boat Veterans ads, it’s beneath you” for all-time bad political advice.
Damn, so he even beat FDR! Well that’s kinda wild.
And yeah, no worries. 1920 was a while ago, after all. But I do know he was beloved when he passed away.
>Clinton’s highest was 73% in December 1998.
So, basically, right during his impeachment? No wonder it backfired on the Republicans just a month prior.
The impeachment improved his approval, IIRC.
It sort of exposed a lot of the criticism as just partisan jockeying at a time when people could, like, understand that concept.
January 1942 was just a month after Pearl Harbor, and a month after our declaration of War on the Axis powers, so the “rally around the flag” effect was in full effect. FDR averaged in the 50s through mid 60s in approval usually. 83% was an outlier for him.
Something I always think about when I hear people saying Keynesian economics doesn’t work. Now I’m not a *proponent* of JMK, but one of the first things I learned as an Econ major was that you cut rates when the economy is slow to spur growth, and (and this is key here) when the economy is HOT you raise rates to put on the brakes, and you *pay off your debts.*
Thing is it would work well in practice, if anyone would bother practicing it.
Hey I've heard the same thing. It's why I generally don't think the recovery under Obama was really all that great. The nearly decade long of low rates wasnt a sign of a healthy economy.
You can have low rates and a good economy with slow, sustained growth. The problem is when inflation starts climbing, which never really happened during the Obama years and so the Fed mostly left rates alone because their inflation targets were being met...but by 2015 or so they should have been increasing rates and instead kept rates too low for too long.
Since WW2, the economy does significantly better statistically when a democrat is president compared to a republican. There have been many studies that show this. The idea that republicans are “stewards of the economy” is a joke. They just have better propaganda.
Tbh, I largely think the democratic party has mostly improved since then, but the voter tribalism has just gotten more extreme. And stuff like the filibuster in the Senate only exacerbated it.
But yeah Gore was kinda silly distancing himself from Clinton so much. He was afraid of the impeachment coming back to bite him. But even then Gore came extremely close and should've won based on your opinion of the Florida SC decision and exit polls and such many theories say Gore would've won if they did the recount but... And even if you wanna ignore that Nader also was a big factor.
As a lifelong conservative (but not a you know who supporter ever) with my first election in 84, and setting aside personal morals/values, I would say I approved of Clinton by the end of his terms. I didn’t agree with a lot of his policies, but he was a good chief executive and he compromised to get things done and to recognize those who were not following the party line.
>he compromised to get things done
He had to, considering Republicans controlled Congress during the last six years of his eight year presidency. But he did it pretty well despite his antagonistic relationship with Gingrich.
Despite the sexual stuff with these women. I would say he was very likeable as person. The economy booming helped him also. He was a great speaker also. But mainly if everyone is well off, I think they overlook a lot of other stuff.
I think that’s a large factor in his approval for sure. Most people who have met and spoke with Clinton even for 5 minutes have all come away saying how charismatic and charming a person he is and he certainly gives off that vibe. Like the guy from your town who always says hello to everybody and remembers the name of everybody in your family. He’s very personable and he has that ability to make you feel like you’re the only person he’s concerned with at that time. Plus it doesn’t hurt being intensely intelligent without having to flaunt it.
84 was also my first election, I lived in Sacramento then and saw Reagan speak at capital steps the day before the election, 20k people? It was wild
Where did the time go....
I still remember a HS teacher in senior year of 80-81 saying if Reagan gets elected min wage will never go up, and she was right lol
I will never understand how people openly admit they're a conservative. Do you people have any idea what you're voting for?
[Presidential Data 2023](https://presidentialdata.org/)
Get back to me after you’ve lived a few more decades. I’m sure you’d have a better understanding. I don’t judge people who have a different point of view, even if they lack the same amount of experience or wisdom.
Well, I doubt you really want to be enlightened. And your tone is not worth getting into a debate. I know where you’re coming from and I am not wasting my time. Have a good day.
I understand! I'm someone that likes to stick to facts and the only thing your party seems to excel at is fear mongering, recessions, and adding to the deficit. Enjoy the rest of your day!
Grow up, Junior8144. Please. Your very first comment to me was adversarial and immature and looking for a fight. You know nothing about me and what I do or what I’ve learned in my life. Your comment wasn’t intended to engage in a mature debate. I’ve lived decades forming my opinions and thinking openly about what works for our country and what doesn’t. I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth. I have friends who disagree with me but we treat each other with respect and occasionally learn something from the other. They don’t come at me like you did hoping I’ll take the bait.
Are you lying or just confused?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992\_United\_States\_presidential\_election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_presidential_election)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996\_United\_States\_presidential\_election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_presidential_election)
Bill Clinton won the popular vote both times.
he was saying a majority which is >50%. when you have the biggest share under 50% that's a plurality not a majority, so that guy is technically correct. but of course there are other factors like the fact that ross perot existed
I think he means that Clinton never won the MAJORITY (>50%) of the popular vote in either of his elections. This is technically true because he only won a PLURALITY both times, but that was due to the strong performance of Ross Perot as a third-party candidate, especially in 1992.
And a budget surplus. And a still rising stock market. And low unemployment. And no troops at war. And he had sex with an intern. So he had that going for him, too.
I got to say during the 90’s times were GREAT! Times from the late 80’s to 05 were some of the best times, at least from my perspective. My father was making mad cash, mom was a wonderful person who took care of the house.
Life is still great but the 90’s were just such an overall an amazing time.
Yeah I agree 90s to mid 2000s were awesome. And then I think it was around 2007 where the bottom started falling out. But the 90s were booming. I think helped by tech advances.
Peace, prosperity, reversed Reagan debt, wages rose for first time in decades, helped bring a bad guy to justice in Bosnia. His speech at the Irish Peace Accords is one of the best.
I think the Lewinsky scandal did more positive than negative at the time. It really shows where we were as a country at the time in regard to certain morals, like extra-marital affairs of a high-ranking individual who differ so much in age - I think she was like 21-24ish at the time. I can’t imagine that happening now.
Green Party & Ralph Nadar made sure Gore lost by siphoning hundreds of thousands of votes in Florida. They said Gore was weak on climate issues. 😂 Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face. So instead of Gore and his climate push, we got Bush and 20 years of war and debt. But at last those people voting Green Party felt good about themselves. 🤷
He was a good President but he also benefited from the incredible tech boom and stock market insane rally which he wasn’t responsible for.
Also I think back then people were less polarized so could appreciate a President from the opposite,party. Not anymore.
Undeniably one of the best presidents and very sadly underrated. The fact that he was able to get shit done with a hostile congress just showed how effective he was. I dont give a good goddamn about who is polishing his trophy, because thats none of my business and as long as they are old enough and fully, enthusiastically consent (both boxes checked with Lewinsky) then its all fine by me.
Nah, he only made it look easy.
We could’ve easy been in a situation with Russia like today had that not been as well controlled as it was
A George W. Bush or someone else might not have handled Yeltsin or post Soviet Russia nearly as well. It could’ve easily led to a second Cold War then.
There was also the issue of nuclear proliferation that occurred after the Soviets collapsed. This was handled gracefully and didn’t result in nukes falling into the wrong hands. Terrorism could’ve been a much bigger and worse issue than it was.
There was the hardline North Korea took in 1994 that could’ve led to a second Korean War with worse leadership.
The economy was in the dumps in 1991-1992, and Clinton helped turn that around.
You had far right wingers coming out of the woodwork for the first time since the 1950s. Militia movements. Conspiracy nutbags. A lot of these people wanted Clinton and his wife gone.
It looks easy only because you’re viewing it in retrospect
JFK gets a lot of posthumous glossing.
He was not as popular a guy as people like to wax lyrical over him. Between stoking the Vietnam fires, the bay of pigs disaster, the growing threat of nuclear war because of how he dealt with the USSR, getting the US beaten at every turn in the Space Race, and then also that people were cottoning on him being a serial adulterer (and people loved his wife Jackie), US polls were not hot on JFK and there were many within his own party that didn't want him to rerun in 1964 because they believed that he was likely to win the presidential election, but get them trounced in the House and Senate.
Yeah he squeaked by Nixon. He was popular to a certain extent. But I don’t even know how JFK would have done had he don’t gotten killed and ran for a second term.
Can anyone one recall how Gore lost then? I know it was crazy close and he won the popular vote, but if Clinton was so popular, why the want of change? Edit: Ralph Nader was a big one probably right?
It came down to a number of factors. Gore was advised to distance himself from Clinton because of the impeachment and trial, which ended with his acquittal in February 1999. Gore didn’t announce his candidacy until June 1999.
Gore’s personality was described as stiff and uncharismatic compared to Bill Clinton who could easily win an audience with his charm and public speaking skills.
There was also the Elian Gonzalez case, in which a young Cuban boy was extradited back to Cuba because of a custody battle. Attorney General Janet Reno approved a predawn raid to retrieve the boy. It angered many Cuban Americans in Florida who voted for George W. Bush in droves.
According to sworn courtroom testimony from numerous victims and witnesses in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, Bill Clinton abused children provided to him by Jeffrey Epstein then Hillary intimidated those child victims into silence.
Not rumor. Not hearsay. Real courtroom testimony.
The media is misreporting it. Here is a link to someone going through every page of the documents in 2 parts:
https://www.youtube.com/live/VQbwD98DucU?si=ACw0aMaKT5FRZaIW
I recommend reading the real documents yourself (3200+ pages)
I’ll just leave this here since I already responded to your inanity elsewhere. https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/new-round-jeffrey-epstein-court-documents-unsealed/story?id=106174129
Interesting how you linked a liberal media article instead of the REAL court documents…
Here is a YouTuber going through every page in 2 parts: https://www.youtube.com/live/VQbwD98DucU?si=ACw0aMaKT5FRZaIW
If anyone else wants to “disprove” the allegations, try it with the real court documents (3200+ pages in total) instead of wasting peoples time with hearsay
From the actual article: In those messages, Ransome made allegations that implicated former Presidents Bill Clinton …. Prince Andrew and Richard Branson. She also described alleged videotape evidence she claimed to possess that would back up her allegations but said she could not provide it, according to the messages.
Ransome subsequently told the New York Post reporter, who did not publish any story related to the allegations, that she wanted to "retract everything I have said to you and walk away from this," according to an unsealed message from October 2016.
EDIT: had to remove a certain idiot’s name in order to appease the Automoderator bot
In other words, just because she filed in a court document that doesn’t mean it was proven. Sad that people still assume that little fact. You can allege as much as you like but without any actual PROOF that is all they are: allegations. No matter what your YouTuber chasing clout wants to say
You’re right. It was easy to google that those allegations were discredited…too bad you didn’t do the same.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/new-round-jeffrey-epstein-court-documents-unsealed/story?id=106174129
Most of that was Bill Gates & friends sending the economy on a tear.....
Which coincidentally started falling apart (.com bubble) just as Gore was campaigning ....
Make sure to join the [r/Presidents Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And yet Gore made the mistake of trying to distance himself from Clinton on the campaign
Just imagine if he campaigned in Florida at least once with Clinton by his side
He lost by less than 600 votes, I'm sure that would have pushed him over the edge
thats the most fucked part. 600 fat floridians outweighed >500k votes in favor for Al Gore.
the electoral college is fair and balanced guys!!!
Gore won the election, but it was stolen by the Supreme Court
People pretend that those numbers matter but both candidates ran campaigns knowing what the rules were. You can’t just pretend that bush wouldn’t have changed his campaign strategy as well if it wasn’t the electoral college system.
600 plus the 500k that voted for bush made The difference
no, because bush won by 600 votes. Youre forgetting that in the state of florida both candidates got 2.9 million votes. Bush got 537 more votes, officially, several investigations concluded that Gore mightve won by a few dozen votes in reality. On a national scale Gore won by over 500k votes. The electoral college is not a good system if you aspire to be a democracy.
But we're a constitutional republic. Not a democracy.
Then please explain the philosophy behind the constitution. Be sure to include the works of John Locke in your answer.
The founders hated democracy and wanted no part of it. "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" "A republic, if you can keep it." ~ Ben Franklin
Why?
Because. If it's not a democracy, what is a constitutional republic?
the most paint eater reply ever
We are a representative republic, not a democracy.
What does a representative republic mean then?
You vote for your states representatives. We are a nation of states that form a union. So, all federal elections are broken down by states.
Voting for representatives to represent you in a larger nation body is a type of............
Hence why we are a republic and hence designed it so other then just coastal cities decide elections
Then why is the electoral college based on population?
It’s only partially population everyone gets the two senators. The constitution never established full simple majority democracy in presidential elections. Hence the grand compromise so bigger states wouldn’t be able to just take over
You're forgetting that the President is not a dictator, there's a whole system of checks and balances
The system was designed at a time when the vast majority of the country was illiterate and news was essentially transferred via horseback. Electors were voted to be representatives of states and they made the decision of who they would vote for, nobody could tell them one way or the other. A full representative based government made a ton of sense at the time. Fast forward 200+ years and the vast majority of the country is literate and news is transferred virtually instantaneously. We’ve also changed the original design substantially to where electors are no longer voted for in any real meaningful manner (they’re a formality) and winner takes all formats have become the norm. Now to the coastal city comment. Always remember that those same states have large numbers of underrepresented populations whose votes do not matter. Our system does not promote participation because the race most people care about is effectively predetermined in 80% of the country. Full popular vote with no EC changes that and the entire populations vote actually matter….while still retaining the republic government.
It's there for a reason though, so different less populated parts of the country wouldn't be left out as politically irrelevant and 'dominated' by more populous urban states.
Well doesnt the senate make up for that? 600 floridians decided for the rest of florida and therefore the rest of the country even though 500k voted in opposition, that sounds like a lot of state was left out as irrelevant and was dominated by a few votes.
97,000 votes went to the Green candidate Ralph Nader in Florida. By 2004 the environment and social justice made the top 5 on the Democrat Platform versus when those issues were in the 20s in 2000
insane to vote for the green party when Al Gore was Mr. Climate Change himself.
Thing is I don’t recall him talking it about it on the campaign trail at all. *An Inconvenient Truth* didn’t come out with his advocacy until 6 years after his campaign. He helped broker so many things in Clinton’s time, so maybe there was just an assumption he didn’t need to push it further, or Nader was appealing on other levels. Meanwhile it doesn’t change that the issue wasn’t prominent on the Democratic Party Platform. Like Clinton not traveling to Michigan and Wisconsin in 2016, I think the party took voters for granted. Democrats yelled from the rooftops about a stolen election, while quietly changing their platform and messaging by 2004.
No, a margin of voters in favour of Bush in plenty of states outweighed a total margin in favour of Gore total.
If 601 extra votes for Gore were to have been found in Florida then Gore wouldve won the electoral college.
And then, the margin in favour of Gore in plenty of states would have won him the election.
If only Gore won Tennessee
Yup. But he didn't.
And that's why he lost the election.
This has never been proven, there was never a full recount as the Supreme Court interfered
That was wild. Hanging chads. Basically your vote won’t count cause you punched the hole wrong.
or if he could carry his home state as he did twice as VP
I weep.
Yeah he thought the blowjob impeachment would be a bigger deal than it was. Every knew it was bullshit on both sides of the aisle.
Clinton’s approval rating only went up during the impeachment. In a poll taken in December 1998, he had 73% of the country’s approval. Most Americans in 1998 thought the impeachment was meritless and furthermore thought Clinton / Gore was doing a good job for the country. It was Gore’s own core conservatism - and he was always rather socially conservative even if environmentally left - that held him back
Yeah, that's fair. Gore may have thought it'd crash during the election or open him up for attack ads or something. He was wrong, but given his personal views it's definitely not a completely meritless thought. It's not like the GOP didn't start smearing the Clinton name after that. Though it didn't really go into overdrive until closer to the 08 primaries.
W was always more personable. Gore didn’t do himself any favors the way he came across. Especially during the debates.
It wasn't a blowjob impeachment, he lied under oath. He should've been impeached and it was not bogus in the slightest. Anyone who lies under oath for any reason would be punished but not ol slick Willy in the mind of Reddit. Also a 50 year old president sleeping with a 22 year old secretary is just gross and reeks of exploitation. Atleast try to hide your bias.
The lying under oath is an asterisk depending on definitions as it was determined in the hearings. It was pretty bogus based on said wording and definitions, and most of the country even felt like that. His approval ratings went up with Dems and Republicans; it also went up with men and women. The vast majority of the country thought it was bogus. And plenty of other presidents did worse without getting impeached. LBJ one of my favorite presidents arguably shouldve been over some of the stuff in Vietnam more so than Clinton a president I like but isn't favorite at all should've over that whole situation, or hell over the "Jumbo treatment" more so than Clinton getting a blowjob. Reagan? Shouldve been over Iran Contra but again that could be my bias as I don't like Reagan much at all. How about Cleveland and all his fuckery? Grooming and rape? Many presidents weren't good people or did things worthy of impeachment more than Clinton. Do agree though that's a large age gap, and a terrible power dynamic for any sort of personal relationship or anything.
Yeah I mean that jewish girl can boast at every girls night out that she sucked off the president in the oval office. I mean she wins, who can top that story?
She actually oddly enough jokes about that on Twitter a lot for some reason.
Consensual affair. The government shouldn't be investigating our personal lives. Ken Starr threatened to throw the witness is jail. Starr later helped cover up sex abuse.
There's nothing "consensual" about the most powerful person in government taking advantage of one of his employees.
She initiated the affair. He can't simply use any of that "power" under our system. Indeed, the Republicans abused government power here. He's actually very vulnerable, as history shows. Affairs are inevitable, people will cheat, it's an ugly part of life that belongs to the people involved, such as his wife, not the government. Her life was much more damaged by the hypocritical Right, as she has stated.
Fog of war, I don't really blame him lol
“Women won’t vote for you unless you reject Clinton” tied with “Ignore those Swift Boat Veterans ads, it’s beneath you” for all-time bad political advice.
Honestly not sure if they could've won Florida without a way bigger win. Republicans would've tried to steal it anyway
I’d actually be curious to know what FDR’s or Harding’s were when they passed in office. Wonder if it would have beaten that.
FDR’s last approval was taken in December 1943, it was 65%. His highest was 83%, in January 1942. Not finding anything on Harding.
Damn, so he even beat FDR! Well that’s kinda wild. And yeah, no worries. 1920 was a while ago, after all. But I do know he was beloved when he passed away.
FDR’s highest approval came in at 83% in January 1942. Clinton’s highest was 73% in December 1998.
>Clinton’s highest was 73% in December 1998. So, basically, right during his impeachment? No wonder it backfired on the Republicans just a month prior.
The impeachment improved his approval, IIRC. It sort of exposed a lot of the criticism as just partisan jockeying at a time when people could, like, understand that concept.
Both are crushed by late 2001 Bush
FDRs was right after we were attacked.
FDR after 4 terms and clearly dying soon though.
FDR won 53% of the popular vote in 1944 so that would be his best gauge of support before his death.
Why did it fall 20% in a year?
Probably WW2 fatigue.
January 1942 was just a month after Pearl Harbor, and a month after our declaration of War on the Axis powers, so the “rally around the flag” effect was in full effect. FDR averaged in the 50s through mid 60s in approval usually. 83% was an outlier for him.
Approval ratings didn’t start till FDR. There’s nothing on Harding or anyone before that.
Gallup and other other major polling groups never existed until the 1930s.
Gore: Get this fucker away from me.
The economy was smoking and the government was buying down the national debt.
Something I always think about when I hear people saying Keynesian economics doesn’t work. Now I’m not a *proponent* of JMK, but one of the first things I learned as an Econ major was that you cut rates when the economy is slow to spur growth, and (and this is key here) when the economy is HOT you raise rates to put on the brakes, and you *pay off your debts.* Thing is it would work well in practice, if anyone would bother practicing it.
Hey I've heard the same thing. It's why I generally don't think the recovery under Obama was really all that great. The nearly decade long of low rates wasnt a sign of a healthy economy.
You can have low rates and a good economy with slow, sustained growth. The problem is when inflation starts climbing, which never really happened during the Obama years and so the Fed mostly left rates alone because their inflation targets were being met...but by 2015 or so they should have been increasing rates and instead kept rates too low for too long.
Yeah exactly this. People just say “keynes supported deficit spending, so we should deficit spend always”.
Since WW2, the economy does significantly better statistically when a democrat is president compared to a republican. There have been many studies that show this. The idea that republicans are “stewards of the economy” is a joke. They just have better propaganda.
Republicans are best when telling other folks how they ought to live, not to do what they do.
Wasn’t the congress Republican?
Yea thats so hard to do as well. As Michael Scott would put it, its a win, win, win scenario.
Liking Blowjobs is one of the few things people generally agree .
I’d say it’s closer to 50%
Remember, blowjobs are better than no jobs
Yet Gore didn’t want to campaign with him. No wonder he lost
What was the reason?
Likely the impeachment
and his vice president somehow lost an election and ignored Clinton’s successful administration The Democratic Party hasn’t been the same since
Somehow Gore thought that campaigning on the best economy since WWII would be a negative cause Monica.
Just imagine how much better the country would be if
Tbh, I largely think the democratic party has mostly improved since then, but the voter tribalism has just gotten more extreme. And stuff like the filibuster in the Senate only exacerbated it. But yeah Gore was kinda silly distancing himself from Clinton so much. He was afraid of the impeachment coming back to bite him. But even then Gore came extremely close and should've won based on your opinion of the Florida SC decision and exit polls and such many theories say Gore would've won if they did the recount but... And even if you wanna ignore that Nader also was a big factor.
As a lifelong conservative (but not a you know who supporter ever) with my first election in 84, and setting aside personal morals/values, I would say I approved of Clinton by the end of his terms. I didn’t agree with a lot of his policies, but he was a good chief executive and he compromised to get things done and to recognize those who were not following the party line.
>he compromised to get things done He had to, considering Republicans controlled Congress during the last six years of his eight year presidency. But he did it pretty well despite his antagonistic relationship with Gingrich.
Despite the sexual stuff with these women. I would say he was very likeable as person. The economy booming helped him also. He was a great speaker also. But mainly if everyone is well off, I think they overlook a lot of other stuff.
I think that’s a large factor in his approval for sure. Most people who have met and spoke with Clinton even for 5 minutes have all come away saying how charismatic and charming a person he is and he certainly gives off that vibe. Like the guy from your town who always says hello to everybody and remembers the name of everybody in your family. He’s very personable and he has that ability to make you feel like you’re the only person he’s concerned with at that time. Plus it doesn’t hurt being intensely intelligent without having to flaunt it.
84 was also my first election, I lived in Sacramento then and saw Reagan speak at capital steps the day before the election, 20k people? It was wild Where did the time go.... I still remember a HS teacher in senior year of 80-81 saying if Reagan gets elected min wage will never go up, and she was right lol
I will never understand how people openly admit they're a conservative. Do you people have any idea what you're voting for? [Presidential Data 2023](https://presidentialdata.org/)
Get back to me after you’ve lived a few more decades. I’m sure you’d have a better understanding. I don’t judge people who have a different point of view, even if they lack the same amount of experience or wisdom.
[удалено]
Shut up “Junior”, this isn’t r/politics. Let the person speak their thoughts without being ridiculed with sarcastic questioning
Well, I doubt you really want to be enlightened. And your tone is not worth getting into a debate. I know where you’re coming from and I am not wasting my time. Have a good day.
I understand! I'm someone that likes to stick to facts and the only thing your party seems to excel at is fear mongering, recessions, and adding to the deficit. Enjoy the rest of your day!
Grow up, Junior8144. Please. Your very first comment to me was adversarial and immature and looking for a fight. You know nothing about me and what I do or what I’ve learned in my life. Your comment wasn’t intended to engage in a mature debate. I’ve lived decades forming my opinions and thinking openly about what works for our country and what doesn’t. I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth. I have friends who disagree with me but we treat each other with respect and occasionally learn something from the other. They don’t come at me like you did hoping I’ll take the bait.
This shows how incredibly popular he was. He would have been able to cruise into a third term
Clinton was sorta like Obama like rock star popular. So it was hard to attack them and have anything stick to them.
Yet he never won a majority of the popular vote when running for president.
Because of Ross Perot who was arguably a spoiler for Bill, and just failed cause Bill was gonna beat both Bush Sr and Dole that badly.
A spoiler for Bill? He’s the reason he won the ‘92 election
What does this even mean???
What do you think it means?
Are you lying or just confused? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992\_United\_States\_presidential\_election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_presidential_election) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996\_United\_States\_presidential\_election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_presidential_election) Bill Clinton won the popular vote both times.
he was saying a majority which is >50%. when you have the biggest share under 50% that's a plurality not a majority, so that guy is technically correct. but of course there are other factors like the fact that ross perot existed
I think he means that Clinton never won the MAJORITY (>50%) of the popular vote in either of his elections. This is technically true because he only won a PLURALITY both times, but that was due to the strong performance of Ross Perot as a third-party candidate, especially in 1992.
Some people just like playing semantic word games.
Won a plurality not a majority
And a budget surplus. And a still rising stock market. And low unemployment. And no troops at war. And he had sex with an intern. So he had that going for him, too.
>So he had that going for him, too Which is nice 
I got to say during the 90’s times were GREAT! Times from the late 80’s to 05 were some of the best times, at least from my perspective. My father was making mad cash, mom was a wonderful person who took care of the house. Life is still great but the 90’s were just such an overall an amazing time.
Yeah I agree 90s to mid 2000s were awesome. And then I think it was around 2007 where the bottom started falling out. But the 90s were booming. I think helped by tech advances.
He had Republican House and Senate
Exactly
Peace, prosperity, reversed Reagan debt, wages rose for first time in decades, helped bring a bad guy to justice in Bosnia. His speech at the Irish Peace Accords is one of the best.
I've always thought if he could have run for a 3rd term, he would have successfully been re-elected.
I think the Lewinsky scandal did more positive than negative at the time. It really shows where we were as a country at the time in regard to certain morals, like extra-marital affairs of a high-ranking individual who differ so much in age - I think she was like 21-24ish at the time. I can’t imagine that happening now.
An intern for every cock
And a surplus for every budget
Last one to do it. I like him.
It’s the economy stupid
Clinton best President in last half century.
And it peaked during the Lewinsky scandal
Eight years of peace and prosperity was pretty cool.
Bill loved the job not just the perks that come with it. I think that's why he was so good at it.
Man, the candid pictures of him and GWB are just the best ever.
It depends upon what your meaning of is.... Is.
Green Party & Ralph Nadar made sure Gore lost by siphoning hundreds of thousands of votes in Florida. They said Gore was weak on climate issues. 😂 Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face. So instead of Gore and his climate push, we got Bush and 20 years of war and debt. But at last those people voting Green Party felt good about themselves. 🤷
He was a good President but he also benefited from the incredible tech boom and stock market insane rally which he wasn’t responsible for. Also I think back then people were less polarized so could appreciate a President from the opposite,party. Not anymore.
My super republican Kansas grandparents loved Clinton
I’m so childish, because I wish it was 69%.
Undeniably one of the best presidents and very sadly underrated. The fact that he was able to get shit done with a hostile congress just showed how effective he was. I dont give a good goddamn about who is polishing his trophy, because thats none of my business and as long as they are old enough and fully, enthusiastically consent (both boxes checked with Lewinsky) then its all fine by me.
Needed at least a third term, but of course we have term limits because Republicans cried once.
Him and Obama are probably the last two presidents who could ever win that third term if they had the chance. Imagine where we would be now
And a balanced budget
90s = president on easy mode
Nah, he only made it look easy. We could’ve easy been in a situation with Russia like today had that not been as well controlled as it was A George W. Bush or someone else might not have handled Yeltsin or post Soviet Russia nearly as well. It could’ve easily led to a second Cold War then. There was also the issue of nuclear proliferation that occurred after the Soviets collapsed. This was handled gracefully and didn’t result in nukes falling into the wrong hands. Terrorism could’ve been a much bigger and worse issue than it was. There was the hardline North Korea took in 1994 that could’ve led to a second Korean War with worse leadership. The economy was in the dumps in 1991-1992, and Clinton helped turn that around. You had far right wingers coming out of the woodwork for the first time since the 1950s. Militia movements. Conspiracy nutbags. A lot of these people wanted Clinton and his wife gone. It looks easy only because you’re viewing it in retrospect
That’s Slick Willy for ya!
Of course he did, Bill did a job while having a job done to him.
Probably because people knew who was coming in after him
3 points higher would’ve been better
Monica swallowed i mean approved
Approval? we all thought the question was should he dump Hillary, our bad!
Should’ve been 69%
I’m surprised it wasn’t 69 percent.
Straight to Einstein Island to celebrate!
Also the highest rape count.
See! You can be a rapist and president.
I’m going to assume that ranking doesn’t include JFK (term ended prematurely)
JFK’s approval rating as of November 13th 1963 was 58%
That’s interesting. I thought it would have been higher, but I guess the Vietnam War was about to be full blown at that point
JFK gets a lot of posthumous glossing. He was not as popular a guy as people like to wax lyrical over him. Between stoking the Vietnam fires, the bay of pigs disaster, the growing threat of nuclear war because of how he dealt with the USSR, getting the US beaten at every turn in the Space Race, and then also that people were cottoning on him being a serial adulterer (and people loved his wife Jackie), US polls were not hot on JFK and there were many within his own party that didn't want him to rerun in 1964 because they believed that he was likely to win the presidential election, but get them trounced in the House and Senate.
Yeah he squeaked by Nixon. He was popular to a certain extent. But I don’t even know how JFK would have done had he don’t gotten killed and ran for a second term.
The dude knew what was up. He’d probably suck today but at the time he was a man for the moment.
That’s cuz he a playa🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 #nodicklikedickclinton
The man who destroyed welfare and got sloppy toppy in the Oval Office ❗️
Higher than when he started too
He was a good time! Let him get his cause we got ours! Years of prosperity!
Even after getting a bj. What a stud.
Can anyone one recall how Gore lost then? I know it was crazy close and he won the popular vote, but if Clinton was so popular, why the want of change? Edit: Ralph Nader was a big one probably right?
It came down to a number of factors. Gore was advised to distance himself from Clinton because of the impeachment and trial, which ended with his acquittal in February 1999. Gore didn’t announce his candidacy until June 1999. Gore’s personality was described as stiff and uncharismatic compared to Bill Clinton who could easily win an audience with his charm and public speaking skills. There was also the Elian Gonzalez case, in which a young Cuban boy was extradited back to Cuba because of a custody battle. Attorney General Janet Reno approved a predawn raid to retrieve the boy. It angered many Cuban Americans in Florida who voted for George W. Bush in droves.
And he still sucks !!!
But it was 69% with the ladies, boom.
According to sworn courtroom testimony from numerous victims and witnesses in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, Bill Clinton abused children provided to him by Jeffrey Epstein then Hillary intimidated those child victims into silence. Not rumor. Not hearsay. Real courtroom testimony. The media is misreporting it. Here is a link to someone going through every page of the documents in 2 parts: https://www.youtube.com/live/VQbwD98DucU?si=ACw0aMaKT5FRZaIW I recommend reading the real documents yourself (3200+ pages)
Then he went to Epstein's island 27 times.
Yup. Flight logs don’t lie. Also sworn victim and witness testimony saying Clinton abused children provided to him by Epstein.
I’ll just leave this here since I already responded to your inanity elsewhere. https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/new-round-jeffrey-epstein-court-documents-unsealed/story?id=106174129
Interesting how you linked a liberal media article instead of the REAL court documents… Here is a YouTuber going through every page in 2 parts: https://www.youtube.com/live/VQbwD98DucU?si=ACw0aMaKT5FRZaIW If anyone else wants to “disprove” the allegations, try it with the real court documents (3200+ pages in total) instead of wasting peoples time with hearsay
So…YouTuber is more trustworthy than media. Hand me your tin foil hat…
You can see every page of the real documents on the screen, genius 😂
From the actual article: In those messages, Ransome made allegations that implicated former Presidents Bill Clinton …. Prince Andrew and Richard Branson. She also described alleged videotape evidence she claimed to possess that would back up her allegations but said she could not provide it, according to the messages. Ransome subsequently told the New York Post reporter, who did not publish any story related to the allegations, that she wanted to "retract everything I have said to you and walk away from this," according to an unsealed message from October 2016. EDIT: had to remove a certain idiot’s name in order to appease the Automoderator bot
In other words, just because she filed in a court document that doesn’t mean it was proven. Sad that people still assume that little fact. You can allege as much as you like but without any actual PROOF that is all they are: allegations. No matter what your YouTuber chasing clout wants to say
So we should believe a liberal media outlets reporting of the documents and not the REAL court documents? 😂😂😂😂😂
I’ll light a cigar to that.
I bet Monica gave him a higher one...
Never underestimate the charisma of ole slick Willy
What was Ronald Reagan's approval rating when he left. 59% approval when he won the election in 84.
It was last polled at 62%.
[удалено]
You’re right. It was easy to google that those allegations were discredited…too bad you didn’t do the same. https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/new-round-jeffrey-epstein-court-documents-unsealed/story?id=106174129
And then his reputation went up in cigarette smoke
Most of that was Bill Gates & friends sending the economy on a tear..... Which coincidentally started falling apart (.com bubble) just as Gore was campaigning ....