The point is Trump gets blamed for being a "sexist", but what Clinton did was perverted and embarrassing to the presidency
Having consensual sexual relations could be reasonably labeled a lot of things, but "perverted" is nothing more than one person's personal opinion, and hardly an appropriate use of the Constitutional impeachment process.
That said, there is no doubt that Bill Clinton's behavior was inappropriate. No Democratic politician ever suggested otherwise. But like the overwhelming majority of Americans of BOTH parties, they believed that such a standard for personal behavior (i.e. "adultery while in office") was an absurd reason to impeach a president, if for no other reason than the FACT that almost every single POTUS of the 20th century would have been impeached, as well.
Personal indiscretions are different than professional misconduct. It's really as simple as that. Most people understand that. And that explains why most Americans viewed Clinton's impeachment trial as a partisan witch hunt, while most Americans thought Trump deserved to be removed from office.
Dems should've joined republicans to remove him, that would've united the country.
:lamo
In what alternative universe? What are you smoking?
77% of the American public OPPOSED impeachment of Bill Clinton...including about 95% of Democrats and about 55% of Republicans. His public ALL-TIME public approval rating (i.e. 71%) was recorded in December of '98, just AFTER the GOP-lead House impeached him. Even REPUBLICAN support for Clinton peaked (at 41%) after that disgraceful impeachment vote by the House.
Only in the minds of the rabid anti-Clinton far-right MINORITY of the country would a conviction of Clinton in the Senate be viewed as "uniting the country". Appeasing the most divisive faction of the electorate is divisive, not unifying.
Did you ever stop and think if Gore condemned Clinton for the Lewinsky scandal, he could've beat George W. Bush?
What nonsense. Virtually the entire country understood that the Clinton impeachment was a partisan farce. The only people who would have supported Gore for publicly condemning Clinton were the Republicans who would have ultimately voted for Bush anyway. From the very beginning, opposition to Republicans' impeachment efforts rarely dipped BELOW 60%.
Oh the other hand, SUPPORT for Trump's impeachment remained ABOVE 50% for most of the process in the House. So, tell me...Have you ever stopped to consider that if Pence had condemned Trump for the endless stream of jaw-dropping corruption scandals he has brought to the Oval Office, he would be running as a fairly popular (among moderate Gopers and Dems) incumbent right now? If not, why not?
Gore was just as complacent in that at the time and that's one of the reasons he lost.
More nonsense.
In reality, Gore lost because he tried too hard to distance himself from Clinton's record, which remained wildly popular. Picking Lieberman as his running mate was the single-most decisive factor. That, along with the unpredictable and historically partisan USSC decision to appoint W. Bush to the Oval Office.
