How about this Liberal? Maybe DJT is taking these ideas a little further than GWB did
19950124195700002.MP4-M20.mp4
19950124195700002.MP4-M20.mp4
PATXWV, ATLKVB, et al
- Thread starter D. Denzil Finney
- Start date
Actually, Billy governed as a typical liberal from 1992 to 1994 (I think I got the years right). He appointed Hillary to design our health care system, which she did in secret. Americans overwhelmingly turned against Billy and in the 1994 election (Gingrich's Contract With America), the Dems got wiped out. The GOP took control of the House with a 54 seat swing for the first time in over 40 years.
Billy was in deep trouble. This is when Dick Morris developed his famous triangulation strategy which moved Billy much further right. He stated that he raised taxes too much (top rate went to 39.6%). He said the era of big government is over. He eventually signed (after several vetoes) the Welfare Reform Bill requiring work for benefits. In initiated criminal justice reform that put more criminals in prison (and is being attacked for that now and was during the election as being racist). As you saw, he used rhetoric against illegal immigration. He eventually signed onto Gingrich's plan to balance the budget greatly aided by the peace dividend and the dot.com revolution.
Billy was not a true ideologue, in my opinion. He was a pragmatist and much more centrist at heart than Obama. Obama wanted and did more the party much further to the left. That was the fundamental transformation that Obama spoke of often. He frequently cited Reagan as the model for him. Reagan successfully moved the country to the right. Obama wanted to have that same impact in moving it to the left. Billy actually warned Hillary to stop ignoring the rust belt, blue collar workers. Her campaigned ignored him.
His education comments are interesting. We MUST improve our education system for everyone. But simply throwing money at it (Obama threw billions at it and a report issued just a week or so ago deemed it a failure). We must be much more innovative if we want real improvements. Median income has not risen since 1999. And if we don't improve median income and make America the land of opportunity for all, we will self destruct.
Last edited:
What a bunch of disingenuous doublespeak. He'd be run out of today's Democrat Left party talking like that, and Republicans who are advocating today much of what he got claps for from Dems back then are now nothing but racists today to the modern Left.
They (and him/Clinton) were full of it then, and even more so now. Funny how the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Unreal.
Last edited:
His initiatives prior to the "triangulation" strategy you mentioned PAX were involved with the DLC (Democrat Leadership Council) which essentially tried to make the Dems back then almost similar to Trump's populism of today.
They favored a mix of center-right policies like targeted tax cuts, Welfare/work requirements, Immigration reforms and some limited spending restraints in an attempt to appeal to a wider base of non-traditional Democrat voters.
It didn't last long. By the time Al Gore and his environmental Nazis wrested control of the Party apparatus from the DLC types in 2000, the Dems had sealed their fate with the kook fringe Left who today are threatening to run that once great party of Scoop Jackson and Sam Nunn over the cliff.
Great point. I completely forgot about the DLC. Clinton was a member. They don't exist any longer since the party has gone so far left. Al Gore, at one time, was pretty centrist, wow, what a change in him. Of course he is much wealthier since he became devoted to global warming. Most if not all of the old Blue Dogs are gone. The Senate has a few centrists, but not many and if Trump succeeds, they may be gone by 2018. I think 8 or 10 Senators from Trump states are up for election.
My Mom was a Kennedy Democrat in the 60's and even he would be hounded from the Left wing of today's Dem party. Kennedy sounded like Reagan back in the day!
Actually Pax I'm enjoying watching the disintegration of the Dems who have swallowed the Left's 'clockwork orange' psychology like Charles Manson devotees. They're flailing around trying to figure out Trump, or how to Demonize him and they're oblivious to what's happened to them.
Did you read the post someone put up about them "learning" how to talk to the average Trump voter? I laughed so hard at that I almost peed on myself.
Let 'em keep it up and just as you said by 2018 most political observers will be writing their electoral epitaphs.
YES YOU ARE. So many parts of this SOTU speech are aligned with Digit's (DJT) offerings. Clinton and Gingrich worked together to have the last balanced budget - - a novelty in itself.
Given Billy's comments on immigration, do you think if he gave that speech today, he would have any realistic aspirations in the current Dem party?
Clinton didn't want a balanced budget back then, he really wanted to get re-elected so Lewinski could finish polishing his extention in the Oval Office.
He knew Gingrich and his 'Contract with America' were popular, and in order to survive politically he had to play nice. They dragged him kicking and screaming to Welfare and budget reforms, and then later he (Clinton) and the recalcitrant Dems tried to take credit for the success forced on them by the Newt & the boyz.
I don't worry or think about Party affiliation, I think more and worry more about the State of our Union. In answer to your question I will respond via your scenario. Is Dijit in somewhat of the same position with the Republican party?
Mr Gingrich doesn't relate to that scenario in that matter- -The times I have heard him talk about it is with the pronoun we.
You did not answer my question, you evaded my question. Please answer it with truthfulness. Trump is in alignment within areas with the conservative party. He is out of alignment in other areas. But he is far more in alignment then out of alignment. That is why there is a realignment going on in this country right now. Trump is making the party, the working man's party. And he's making serious inroads into minority communities. His Plans for inner cities including dramatically reduced crime, education choice, infrastructure spending, and tax credit zones for business growth, are all aimed at improving the lives of minorities in inner cities.
If this was the question you were referring to:
Probably no worse than what MR. Trump is having with some from his own party. BTW, when did he switch to Republican party?
You're either not in touch with the current Dem party or you're intentionally deceiving. Billy's immigration speech, era of big government being over speech, crime control speech,, welfare reform speech etc. would eliminate him for any realistic chance at a presidential run. The party have moved very, very far to the left.
Trump is not a conservative, he is a populist. That is what I spoke of when I mentioned a realignment. And he won the nomination.
Last edited:
You rant about deception and deflection yet you just did it to me. I never said he was a Conservative; I asked you when DJT switched to the Republican and you deflected the answer. Regardless of what you want to call him, is he not a registered Republican? Did he get the Republican nomination as a Democrat, a Libertarian, or an Independent, or better yet as a populist? I think not.
I was half joking. I'm not sure he ever was a Democrat, but he did used to give to Democrat candidates. He was also once Pro Choice, but I think he said his second Wife made him rethink that position.
You have yet to answer my question. Would Bill Clinton have any chance of winning the Democrat nomination for president?
Trump ran obviously as a Republican. I have no idea when he switched parties or if he did switch parties at all. But he ran on a populist platform. It is neither conservative nor liberal.
Most elements of his platform are conservative. These include the types of judges he proposes to appoint, lowering taxes, repatriation of overseas profits, lowering regulations, reducing the size of government, sending power back to the states etc. but some of his platform is populist such as his trade positions, his immigration positions and his America first economic and foreign-policy.
That is the realignment that I am talking about.
As I asked previously, would Bill Clinton have any chance of becoming president in the Dem party of today?
Really appreciate reading your posts. Nice to see logical, factual presentations well stated. Congratulations.