Skip to comments.
The Clintons' win-loss record
Washington Times ^
| Sunday, November 28, 2004
| House Editorial
Posted on 11/27/2004 11:50:10 PM PST by JohnHuang2
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com
Published November 28, 2004
Two weeks after yet another Democratic debacle at the polls, a crowd estimated at 30,000 celebratory partisans joined Bill and Hillary Clinton in a literal and metaphorical rainstorm to commemorate his two-term presidency at a ceremony dedicating the William J. Clinton Presidential Center in Little Rock. With Bill reportedly still weak and tired from his recent heart-bypass surgery, Hillary handled many of the non-stop media interviews, including a lengthy prime-time appearance on the Fox News Channel the night before the dedication.
How appropriate. Having been clobbered in the Nov. 2 elections, the Democratic Party lies in tatters. Meanwhile, Hillary, emerging as her party's front-runner for the 2008 nomination, turns in a co-starring performance at the Clinton library celebration in Little Rock, where the all-Hillary-all-the-time media extravaganza effectively turned into a debutante party with all the presidential trimmings.
While the last 12 years have obviously been great for all Democrats named Clinton, perhaps their party colleagues should take a closer look at how they have fared since the self-styled "Comeback Kid" turned a 25 percent, second-place performance into victory in the Feb. 18, 1992, New Hampshire primary. The record for the Democratic Party is as definitive as it is devastating.
Going into the 1992 elections with Bill Clinton at the top of his party's ticket, Democrats occupied 266 seats in the House, producing a 100-seat advantage over Republicans. With only 166 representatives, Republicans hadn't controlled so few House seats since the day after the 1982 election, when the highest ...
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: adultery; bethcoulson; bobbieannwilliams; bodybagbill; bodycount; brownmurder; cheating; christinezercher; clinton; clintonlegacy; clintonlibrary; corruption; criminal; debraschiff; degenerate; disbarred; dollykylebrowning; dragonladyhusband; eileenwellstone; elizabethwardgracen; felony; filthymcnasty; firstblackpresident; fostermurder; genniferflowers; hillbillymarxist; impeached; impeachedx42; juanitabroaddrick; kathleenwilley; kerrydefeat; lecher; legacy; lewd; liar; lust; marilynjojenkins; marshascott; monicalewinsky; morallybankrupt; nancyhernreich; oral; paulajones; perjury; pervert; pollingco; pornography; predator; rape; rapist; sallyperdue; sandraallenjames; scandal; scumbag; sexualharassment; shame; sherriedensuk; singlewidetrailer; sleaze; stainedbluedress; straitjacket; susanmcdougal; thegreatprevaricator; whitetrash; xxxrated
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
To: SkyPilot
I'm not sure that I remember all of this correctly but I seem to recall that shortly after the Republicans regained the majority in 2002, Jumpin' Jim made a couple of remarks sounding the water for a return to the GOP. I believe that he was more or less told "thanks but no thanks".
21
posted on
11/28/2004 3:55:18 AM PST
by
skimbell
To: SkyPilot
---I suspect Jeffords'success as a quasi-Demo may be what keeps Chaffee, Snowe and that third RINO at least nominally Republican---
To: goldstategop
It is simple what the Dems see in the Clinton's. NO MORAL VALUES!
23
posted on
11/28/2004 4:35:12 AM PST
by
Coldwater Creek
('We voted like we prayed")
To: operation clinton cleanup
HRC in '08 would be a gift to Republicans... I still do not think she could win in the primary's, even if they ran the same cast of losers. We can only pray that Hillary runs.... it would be so good. She is the most devisive candidate the Dems have. Barak Obama might be the VP and the run for the White House would be a sight to behold. I'm actually looking forward to it.... kinda like a Demolition Derby, with the Dems running around smashing into each other.
24
posted on
11/28/2004 5:02:41 AM PST
by
Dick Vomer
(liberals suck......... but it depends on what your definition of the word "suck" is.)
To: SkyPilot; maica; ColdSpringGirl
I had forgotten about that Ba$tard Jeffords. I wonder what life is like in the Senate for him now? It must be like Benedict Arnold having to serve in the Continental Army after its victory over the British.just desserts
To: SkyPilot
"I wonder what else he was infected with during his deplorable lifestyle quest?"
Remember that he never released his medical records.
A blood test on him would probably come back with the results in a lead lined bag.
Ick!
Regards,
26
posted on
11/28/2004 5:27:24 AM PST
by
Jimmy Valentine
(DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
To: Dick Vomer
I'm wondering which weak, "I'm Bob Dole and I deserve to be president", aging candidate the Republicans would select to oppose the Hildabeast.
27
posted on
11/28/2004 5:40:23 AM PST
by
UncleSam
To: JohnHuang2
Going into the 1992 elections, Democrats occupied 266 seats in the House, producing a 100-seat advantage over Republicans. In November 1992, the GOP picked up 10 seats in the House by defeating 16 Democratic incumbents. The Nov. 8, 1994, Republicans: 1) defeated 34 Democratic incumbent representatives (without losing a single Republican incumbent in the House) and captured 52 Democratic-held seats in the House; 2) won majority control of the House (230-204 with one independent) for the first time in 40 years; 3) defeated the Democratic speaker of the House; and 4) recaptured majority control (52-48) of the Senate for the first time in eight years by beating two Democratic incumbents and winning six open seats vacated by retiring Democrats. The next day, Democratic Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama switched parties. He was followed three months later by Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, whose defection to the GOP produced a 54-46 Republican majority...Republicans gained control of 30 governorships.
Mr. Clinton easily won re-election in 1996, but Republicans maintained control of the House and increased their majority in the Senate.
While Democrats again achieved incremental gains in the House in 1998 and 2000, and actually tied the GOP in the Senate (50-50) in 2000, Republicans continued to exercise majority control in both bodies after both elections.
Republicans temporarily lost control of the Senate in June 2001, when James Jeffords became an independent, but the GOP regained majority status at the ballot box in November 2002.
Republicans improved their majority in the House in the 2002 and 2004 elections. Republicans added four Senate seats in 2004 (55-44-1). Meanwhile, GOP governors outnumber Democrats (28-21)... Republicans continue to control more state senates and state houses than Democrats do.
28
posted on
11/28/2004 6:19:07 AM PST
by
miltonim
(Fight those who do not believe in Allah. - Koran, Surah IX: 29)
To: goldstategop
I don't get what the Democrats see in Clinton. Look at what's happened to them in the last 12 years, you'd think they'd exile him to Siberia. But no, he's still highly regarded in party circles. Then again to liberals, failure is actually an indication of true greatness. The worse you do, the better a person you are. You're thinking rationally. In general, liberals don't think, they emote. They love Clinton because he makes them feel good.
Junkies love heroine even though it's killing them. Clinton worship by the left is the same sort of thing.
To: JohnHuang2
What I think the Dems like is his "popularity" say what you will he is as charismatic an individual that has ever shown up on stage. I thought it was funny that one of the dems talking heads during the trailer unveiling said Clintons legacy would be that the world loved him. How appropriate.
To: jocon307
31
posted on
11/28/2004 9:31:56 AM PST
by
7.62 x 51mm
(• veni • vidi • vino • visa • "I came, I saw, I drank wine, I shopped")
To: Do not dub me shapka broham
I think that Dennis Hastert has proven to be a much more capable Speaker than his predecessor He's certainly been a very effective Big Government spending machine. It's unbelievable how he's ratcheted up spending and larded on pork. Gigantic deficits as far as the eye can see . . . . . .
That must have been the fine-print Item #11 in the Contract with America: "Spend like it's not our money!"
32
posted on
11/28/2004 9:33:15 AM PST
by
Hank Rearden
(Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
To: investigateworld
LOL! Sorry, I lost my head...
33
posted on
11/28/2004 9:34:17 AM PST
by
7.62 x 51mm
(• veni • vidi • vino • visa • "I came, I saw, I drank wine, I shopped")
To: JohnHuang2
Don't forget the
Presidential Corruption Index, defined by Charles Krauthammer as "the number of laws passed to keep a president's successors from doing what he did.
34
posted on
11/28/2004 11:07:43 AM PST
by
DuncanWaring
(...and Freedom tastes of Reality)
To: goldstategop
Re: "I don't get what the Democrats see in Clinton."
I don't either but then I am not a girl. Demoncrats is the party of girly-men. The real telling part is all the women I knew in the Navy who were liberal Democrats who would talk for hours about the need to do more about sexual harassment but would turn on a dime to condemn Paula Jones. It was hate filled and totally irrational. I wonder if it the old story of smart girls falling for the rogue. The worst he is the stronger she defends him because she is the only one who understands him. And when she gets a STD from him she turns on you for having warned her, it is almost as if your low opinion of him somehow magically cause this disaster.
Someone tell me why we gave women the vote again, I forget.
P.S. I love Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Susanne Fields, Mona Chanan, C. Rice, Mother. If all women were like then and many FR females I wouldn't need to ask the question, alas far too many are not.
35
posted on
11/28/2004 12:37:33 PM PST
by
Mark in the Old South
(Note to GOP "Deliver or perish" Re: Specter I guess the GOP "chooses" to perish)
To: Hank Rearden
I don't think that Denny was necessarily a huge booster-even if he was a signatory-of the
Contract with America. Though I could be mistaken.
To: norton
"why'd the Republicans [ and most everyone else ] dump on Newt Gingrich "
Newt was his own worst enemy. Not the mouthpiece that we should rally behind, though he was 100% correct on the Contract w/ America.
To: JohnHuang2
Clinton put together one of the most effective money raising machines in history. Look how much Kerry raised when he was No-Show candidate from the Get-Go!
You take the Richs', Soros, Riadys', Huangs', chinese officials...there is enough money for any surviving democrat to live a life of luxury...
38
posted on
11/28/2004 1:55:30 PM PST
by
Prost1
(If you teach what your history teachers taught you, you will be corrected...)
To: Do not dub me shapka broham
To: Alamo-Girl
You're welcome!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson