• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?

Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?

  • Total voters
    44
Peter King said:
That is not an attack on you, nor has it anything to do with the flaws of anyone except Terrible Trump. All I just wanted to say is that, how flawed Clinton (Billy boy) might have been, he is still 1000 times more qualified, sane and presidential that the Umpa Lumpa you support will ever be.

FYI, my last post was mean to show the disconnect in the claims you made about Clinton and the reality that you clearly support Devious Donald, who is a very flawed candidate, if not the most flawed candidate of the past 50 years.
Click to expand...

And I have said that I have become a single issue voter (which shocks the hell out of me), the DC Elite either reform or we torch the place. If Trump turns out to be a crap President then to me that is the cost of doing business, it is the cost of sending a critically important message. That said I know for sure how badly Hillary sucks, I have no reason to believe that Trump would be worse.
 
He was a good "President" . . . Great is a stretch but he was good.

Many times I wish that's what we would focus more on. the President part.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
And I have said that I have become a single issue voter (which shocks the hell out of me), the DC Elite either reform or we torch the place. If Trump turns out to be a crap President then to me that is the cost of doing business, it is the cost of sending a critically important message. That said I know for sure how badly Hillary sucks, I have no reason to believe that Trump would be worse.
Click to expand...

It is not up to a minority to decide that the place needs to be "torched". Face it, people voted for people who are sitting in DC. So it is not the fault of the people in DC that voters are so inept at realizing how poorly their politicians perform.

Ooh, and I have seen loads of reasons to believe that Trump would be worse, hell, he already is worse than Hillary. Look at today, now he wants to start racial profiling. The man has a xenophobic, misogynist and racist mind as proven by the idiotic things he says.

Also voting him into office will change little in DC because most if not all the politicians are still DC professionals and will keep Trump in his place.
 
Peter King said:
It is not up to a minority to decide that the place needs to be "torched". Face it, people voted for people who are sitting in DC. So it is not the fault of the people in DC that voters are so inept at realizing how poorly their politicians perform.

Ooh, and I have seen loads of reasons to believe that Trump would be worse, hell, he already is worse than Hillary. Look at today, now he wants to start racial profiling. The man has a xenophobic, misogynist and racist mind as proven by the idiotic things he says.

Also voting him into office will change little in DC because most if not all the politicians are still DC professionals and will keep Trump in his place.
Click to expand...

I fully agree that at the end of the day the failure of Washington is the peoples fault. We refused to do our duty, we turned it over to "experts" and then ignored it, and the experts went about looking after themselves and their utopias with us paying no nevermind.

THis had already largely happened by the time John Anderson from my hometown ran, what was that, 1980?

But when we say "ENOUGH" the only correct response is "as you wish".

That is not what we are getting.

We will get it.

One way.

Or...(this is me trying to honor DP rules)
 
Hawkeye10 said:
I fully agree that at the end of the day the failure of Washington is the peoples fault. We refused to do our duty, we turned it over to "experts" and then ignored it, and the experts went about looking after themselves and their utopias with us playing no nevermind.

But when we say "ENOUGH" the only correct response is "as you wish".

That is not what we are getting.

We will get it.

One way.

Or...
Click to expand...

Or what? Violence like in other countries? I am sorry but that will end badly for everybody, especially for insurgents against the legitimate government. In a democracy you have one option to change the way politics is being done, by the way you vote or become member of a political party.
 
Peter King said:
Or what? Violence like in other countries? I am sorry but that will end badly for everybody, especially for insurgents against the legitimate government. In a democracy you have one option to change the way politics is being done, by the way you vote or become member of a political party.
Click to expand...

Don got the most votes of anyone who has ever done the R primary.

You were saying?
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Don got the most votes of anyone who has ever done the R primary.

You were saying?
Click to expand...

He has won nothing yet, all he did was expose his idiocy to the full voting public. The democratic party can run dozens of adds with the highlights of all the stupid, racist, misogynist and downright insane stuff that he has done. Like defaming a handicapped person, insulting women, Mexicans, racial profiling, waterboarding and to top it off extortion from private companies (like his idiot idea of wanting part of the spoils if the Keystone pipeline.

How about his wonderful idea of allowing weapons/guns in night clubs, sure, drunk people with guns, what on earth could go wrong there. The Don is an idiot who says some of the most stupid things imaginable.
 
Peter King said:
He has won nothing yet, all he did was expose his idiocy to the full voting public. The democratic party can run dozens of adds with the highlights of all the stupid, racist, misogynist and downright insane stuff that he has done. Like defaming a handicapped person, insulting women, Mexicans, racial profiling, waterboarding and to top it off extortion from private companies (like his idiot idea of wanting part of the spoils if the Keystone pipeline.

How about his wonderful idea of allowing weapons/guns in night clubs, sure, drunk people with guns, what on earth could go wrong there. The Don is an idiot who says some of the most stupid things imaginable.
Click to expand...

THis is what I mean, people are freaking OBSESSED with Trump.

Bill Clinton is interesting too, and this is a Bill Clinton thread, let's try to give him some attention too, MKay?

Thank you so much, have a great day, I have had the best Fathers Day in a long time, I not only heard from all my kids (to include the son who is at ROTC @ Ft Knoxs) but also my moms last husband.



:2dancing:
 
a little of both. i didn't like him at the time, but he did compromise, and the 1990s was a good period for the American economy.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
THis is what I mean, people are freaking OBSESSED with Trump.

Bill Clinton is interesting too, and this is a Bill Clinton thread, let's try to give him some attention too, MKay?

Thank you so much, have a great day, I have had the best Fathers Day in a long time, I not only heard from all my kids (to include the son who is at ROTC @ Ft Knoxs) but also my moms last husband.



:2dancing:
Click to expand...


Congrats on fathersday, and this may be about Bill Clinton but I would think he would not like to see his wife win and become the first "first gent".

The original is in red and what I wanted to type is:

Congrats on fathersday, and this may be about Bill Clinton but I would think he would like to see his wife win and become the first "first gent".

Sorry for the confusion. Any typo's are due to typing while half asleep (not a smart move, so my last post, see you tomorrow).
 
Last edited:
radcen said:
Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?
Click to expand...

He was mediocre to fair and got lucky that the economic belt tightening major corporations did under GHWB resulted in a bubble that benefitted him for a couple years. He also was the first Democrat president to lose the house in 40 years and that actually helped his legacy by forcing him to accept some welfare reform.
 
Clinton more-or-less balanced the budget - I give him great credit for that.

But his administration not only let 800,000 Rwandans get hacked to death - he convinced other countries to pull their troops out as well.
For that, he will always be a political scumbag to me.

'When President Bill Clinton flew to Rwanda in 1998 (in a trip in which he never left the airfield), he claimed that he simply didn’t know what was happening in Rwanda. We now have further evidence that Clinton’s claims were false. It is not that the U.S. government didn’t know what was happening in Rwanda. The truth is that we didn’t care.'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...the-clinton-administration-know-about-rwanda/


Bill Clinton is a pathetic coward - and a pathetic pervert to boot.


And I am neither rep nor dem.
 
Peter King said:
Congrats on fathersday, and this may be about Bill Clinton but I would think he would not like to see his wife win and become the first "first gent".
Click to expand...

Sure looks like it.

I dont think you want to know anymore about their relationship than you want to know about mine, And my wife is a slut slave.

Just a hunch.

I am a smart fella and I still cant figure them out, but I am with you, he has no interest in being first Gent.

Between the 08 go and this one this one that much is very clear.
 
Last edited:
DA60 said:
Clinton more-or-less balanced the budget - I give him great credit for that.

But his administration not only let 800,000 Rwandans get hacked to death - he convinced other countries to pull their troops out as well.
For that, he will always be a political scumbag to me.

'When President Bill Clinton flew to Rwanda in 1998 (in a trip in which he never left the airfield), he claimed that he simply didn’t know what was happening in Rwanda. We now have further evidence that Clinton’s claims were false. It is not that the U.S. government didn’t know what was happening in Rwanda. The truth is that we didn’t care.'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...the-clinton-administration-know-about-rwanda/


Bill Clinton is a pathetic coward - and a pathetic pervert to boot.


And I am neither rep nor dem.
Click to expand...

AMERICA FIRST!

He had bigger flaws, but his failures in Bosnia and Rwanda will not be forgotten.
 
In my opinion, all the Presidents since JFK have been either too lazy, stupid or dictatorial to be considered anywhere above "average". Most of them have been on "average" fairly bad.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Much like how old man Bush throws his footwear at the TV when Trump is on I did it when Clinton would hold Town Halls and then invite 9 year olds up in stage to give us a lecture on stuff like US Nuclear Armament Policy.

Using interns as CIGAR humidors was not his only major flaw.
Click to expand...

But it wasn't Clinton that rubbed CIGARS in the public's faces during prime time national TV for five years. Not knowing when to stop is a Republican flaw...and that time it back lashed on them and made them look like the sex obsessed sicko perverts, instead of Clinton....which years later, we come to find out that's exactly what they were....sicko sex predators, molesters and pedophiles.

Every time a political party abuses it's power by using the government to shame people for having an affair or even sex with a consenting adult...and goes out of it's way to entrap and force them to publically confess their "SIN" ...it's just one more step closer to Sharia Law for all of us.
 
Last edited:
Moot said:
But it wasn't Clinton that rubbed CIGARS in the public's faces during prime time national TV for five years. Not knowing when to stop is a Republican flaw...and that time it back lashed on them and made them look like the sex obsessed sicko perverts, instead of Clinton....which years later, we come to find out that's exactly what they were....sicko sex predators, molesters and pedophiles.

Every time a political party abuses it's power by using the government to shame people for having an affair or even sex with a consenting adult...and goes out of it's way to entrap and force them to publically confess their "SIN" ...it's just one more step closer to Sharia Law for all of us.
Click to expand...

Hands. Off. Interns.

This is not so hard I think.

The Wizard of "IS" cant quite manage.

The Clintons never deny themselves anything, or anyone.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Hands. Off. Interns.

This is not so hard I think.

The Wizard of "IS" cant quite manage.

The Clintons never deny themselves anything, or anyone.
Click to expand...

I think forcing people to publically confess to a biblical sin that isn't against the law in order to hold public office surmounts to little more than a religious test, imo. I'm pretty sure the Constitution expressly forbids religious tests....and probably for that very reason....since so many of the founders were quite the sinful philanderers themselves.
 
Last edited:
He was a little of both. Not a bad President, and he was lucky enough to get out of office before the bubble burst, and he also was lucky enough to have a good Congress to work with.
 
Frankly, it was him. Yes, the economic conditions were there for the economy to thrive with a good president, but he was a good president. The congress deserves very little credit in my opinion. For those that want to credit the congress in the 90s, we had the same congress under Bush that we did under Clinton, the only difference was the president.

Had the Republican congress gotten their way in the 90s, they would have done just like they have done since then when they got their way. They would have cut taxes to such a level that there would have been massive deficits and they would have expended huge amounts of political capital fighting for various socially conservative culture war battles.

Clinton was a good president because he was a pragmatist that believed in managing the presidency rather than these lofty notions of "leadership" and doing huge things.
 
Last edited:
radcen said:
Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?
Click to expand...

Welfare reform, great move.
His wife's attempt for HC reform, bad bad bad.
His womanizing, and what's worse lying about it, was despicable.
National security, bad. I like to blame him, at least in part, for 9/11.
He lucked out with the .com bubble.
 
radcen said:
Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?
Click to expand...

Both.

He was an extremely adept politician that was able to see the political headwinds and take the necessary actions needed to maintain power and influence while cementing a legacy. At the same time, he was blessed to be the President during one of the most significant shifts in technological progression that the world has seen which ushered in the arrival of what was essentially a new "standard appliance and utility" that spurred economic growth. I think a boom period would've occurred with nearly any President, the question would've simply been how well. Kudos goes to Clinton for being relatively hands off and by and large allowing that innovative boom to occur without significant government interference.

That said, there was some luck of him leaving before said bubble burst as opposed to in the midst of it. Bubbles, by their nature, burst...and often regardless of whatever intervention that is attempted to change that fact. And Bubbles don't automatically conform to Presidential cycles.
 
Last edited:
Phys251 said:
He showed what a nation can do when a Republican Congress chooses to work with, not just against, a Democratic president. But the outstanding '90s economy wasn't all him.
Click to expand...

The exact same thing could objectively be said that it showed what a nation can do when a Democratic President chooses to work with, not just against, a Republican Congress. There was significant compromise made on the part of Clinton during that time, much to his credit, that is far different than what we saw in the aftermath of 2012 here. Nothing on the part of Barack Obama could be pointed to as even approaching the type of compromising cross aisle partisan endeavor that welfare reform was in the 90's. Compromise is a tango that needs two honestly willing participants, and there was neither in this particular case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom