Caption this: Clinton: "Mandate for Change"

Time | November 16, 1992 | Time

[ejdrapes]

Clinton received 43.01% compared to 37.45% for Bush. Perot received 18.91%. On the maps below Blue is republican and red is democrat. Where's the mandate for change?

[SheLion]

[madvlad]

Can't we just burn the magazine and carry signs
such as "Bill Clinton wuz in the Oral Office"?

Appoint B Klin-toon as the head of the UN;
then; get the US out of the UN and get the UN AND
Bill out of the US!

MV

[soccer_linux_mozilla]

Karl Rove should use this immediately.

[Charles Henrickson]

Clinton's "mandate": "Man, I could use a date!"

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT

[dangus]

Jay Leno: Turns out that the only Republican without a man-date is Cheney's daughter.

[Hi Heels]

That's *sniff* brilliant!

[dead]

How the mighty party has fallen:

[Alberta's Child]

We thank the mainstream media for these silly pronouncements back in November 2002. Clinton was so convinced that he had a "mandate for change" that he embarked on an ambitious plan to pursue this mandate in 1993 and 1994. The result of this gross political miscalculation was a historic repudiation of his administration in the 1994 mid-term elections.

The 2002 and 2004 elections offer some strong evidence that the Democrat Party has never recovered from this ill-advised "mandate" of his.

[madvlad]

Is Klin-toon using Viagra for this effect?

MV

[hoosierboy]

When did the blue states become red states and red states become blue states? It would make sense to me that way. What happened?

[loborojo]

Are you going to finish that Whopper?

[thulldud]

We thank the mainstream media for these silly pronouncements back in November 2002.

Uh, make that 1992.

But you're right all the same. I still remember all the media flatulence about the supposed "new political will" and the constant refrain of "He (GHWB) lost! Get over it!" that I heard at the office over the next year. It seems so poetically fitting that even when the libs win, their very success guarantees the defeat that surely follows.

[New Perspective]

[Alberta's Child]

Thanks for correcting that. LOL.

Gosh -- it seems like 1992 was about 100 years ago, doesn't it?

[lilylangtree]

"Smokin' seegars makes me think better. Hey Monica, sweet thang are you out there? I need some help."

[meandog]

[edwinland]

This Time cover is so good, the caption requires a whole Chapter

Chapter 4

In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small pneumatic tube for written messages, to the left, a larger one for newspapers; and in the side wall, within easy reach of Winston's arm, a large oblong slit protected by a wire grating. This last was for the disposal of waste paper. Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building.

...

Winston dialled 'back numbers' on the telescreen and called for the appropriate issues of The Times, which slid out of the pneumatic tube after only a few minutes' delay. The messages he had received referred to articles or news items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, as the official phrase had it, to rectify. For example, it appeared from The Times of the seventeenth of March that Big Brother, in his speech of the previous day, had predicted that the South Indian front would remain quiet but that a Eurasian offensive would shortly be launched in North Africa. As it happened, the Eurasian Higher Command had launched its offensive in South India and left North Africa alone. It was therefore necessary to rewrite a paragraph of Big Brother's speech, in such a way as to make him predict the thing that had actually happened. Or again, The Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today's issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston's job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones. As for the third message, it referred to a very simple error which could be set right in a couple of minutes. As short a time ago as February, the Ministry of Plenty had issued a promise (a 'categorical pledge' were the official words) that there would be no reduction of the chocolate ration during 1984. Actually, as Winston was aware, the chocolate ration was to be reduced from thirty grammes to twenty at the end of the present week. All that was needed was to substitute for the original promise a warning that it would probably be necessary to reduce the ration at some time in April

[newgeezer]

When did the blue states become red states and red states become blue states? It would make sense to me that way. What happened?

I read somewhere last week that it had been a long-standing tradition to use blue for the incumbent party and red for the challenger. But, because the blue-vs.-red maps became so well-known and mainstream after the 2000 election, the colors stuck and (unfortunately), the Republicans got stuck being commie red.