The Line From Slick Willie to The Donald

 

This is an expansion of a comment made in another post.

It’s been an interesting ride. The line from Bill Clinton to Donald Trump is drawn with anything but a straight line.

Decisions made in the moment, often for short term gain, sets a precedent that is more often than not difficult to step away from. It has ramifications far down the line that proponents of the original action tend to regret. And yet, often times those same people would be happy to repeat the mistake. Such was the decision to save Bill Clinton from the Monica Lewinsky mess.

It was, of course, a mess of his own making. He was elected with a history of “bimbo eruptions” and allegations of criminal sexual misconduct. Most likely, his supporters expected him to comport himself differently in the Oval Office than he had in the Governor’s Mansion in Little Rock. They were wrong. And he could not extract himself so the entire weight of the Democratic/Media Complex was brought to bear.

The circle-the-wagons and do anything movement to save Bill would eventually lead to MoveOn.org and their mantra, “It’s only sex.”

And while I absolutely despise “alternative history” narratives, these questions deserve to be asked:

Had the Democrats pulled the plug on Bill, Albert Gore, Jr. would have become the 43rd President of the United States and faced George W. Bush as the incumbent in 2000. Does he win? Who knows, but the dynamic would have changed. 

Would Hillary have divorced Bill to remain politically viable? Or would she have finally come to the conclusion that there was no viability outside of the New York Senate seat?

If Gore had won in 2000, that would have put W. in the dustbin. Does Obama still rise in ‘08? Or is that left up to America’s first Jewish Vice-President, Joe Lieberman? 

And what of the GOP fortunes? McCain in ‘04? 

Whatever the answers to all these questions, what it does mean is that there is no MoveOn.GOP, that cadre of voters who no longer care about sexual dalliances from their nominee. Without the effort to save Bill Clinton, there is never, ever a Donald Trump.

And we have been living this scenario in reverse these past three years. Opponents of the Trump presidency have been throwing massive amounts of (stuff) at the wall, or should I say, at the bar to see what sticks. We’ve witnessed employees of the Federal Government in open revolt trying to subvert the Administration and, in some cases, trying to bring it down. In the end, any successful attempt would set another precedent, another short term “win” with some nasty long term implications.

It is the ultimate “be careful what you wish for” moment that is only seen best in the rear view mirror.

Published in Politics
Tags:

This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 37 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    John Park (View Comment):

    @seawriter Hadn’t she always been a Yankees fan?

    That is certainly what she claimed the day after she entered the NY Senate race. I’d say it is about as credible as her 60 Minute claim that she wasn’t a Tammy Wynette “Stand by your man” type.

    • #31
  2. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    Chris Campion (View Comment):

    While I really enjoy the occasional retrospectives (seriously, I do), doing this sort of backwards/forwards calculus is a lot like trying to draw a straight line from Godzilla to MechaGodzilla.

    Which means it’s interesting, but ultimately meaningless, other than as a poli “sci” exercise.

    What’s the purpose of learning history if not to draw lines from where we’ve been to where we are now?

    How else do you learn from it? History is not a collection of distinct events on a time plot. They pull and push on the future to give it the shape it has.

    • #32
  3. GFHandle Member
    GFHandle
    @GFHandle

    But Bill didn’t cause the sexual revolution. We were already slippin ana sliddin.

     

    • #33
  4. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):
    When the Lewinsky scandal broke Bill was out of favor with the party’s left wing because of his triangulation after the ’94 elections – they hated welfare reform, balanced budgets, no big new social programs, and the rumors that he and Gingrich might do a deal on entitlements. It was the miscalculation of the GOP in pushing for impeachment that rallied the Left in his defense and created the opening for Hillary’s political future.

    I have never seen this interpretation of events, but it is what I would say too.

     

    • #34
  5. GFHandle Member
    GFHandle
    @GFHandle

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    I remember arguing this from the other (that is Democrat) side: If Bill had done the right thing and resigned, Al Gore would be president. He would not have been worse (I think, anyway). A dreadful campaigner, he would’ve done better in 96 because he wouldn’t have to manage the, um, ambivalent legacy of Bill—I remember that people were embarrassed about Bill’s behavior, “It’s Just Sex” or not.

    It’s actually possible that, without the distraction of a prolonged impeachment fight, the U.S. might have focused on the threat of Al Qaida, and 9/11 might not have happened. That would’ve been nice.

    Had Gore been president during 9/11, he would have attacked Afghanistan but we wouldn’t have gone into Iraq. Make of that what we will.

    But the reason for Bill Clinton to resign after having been caught in the “I did not have sex with that woman” lie is that resignation would’ve been the right thing to do.

    But when was that incident with the masseuse? Would he have been a sitting president then or merely an ex?

    • #35
  6. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Coolidge
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    @GumbyMark

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

     

    Had Gore been president during 9/11, he would have attacked Afghanistan but we wouldn’t have gone into Iraq. Make of that what we will.

    But the reason for Bill Clinton to resign after having been caught in the “I did not have sex with that woman” lie is that resignation would’ve been the right thing to do.

    But when was that incident with the masseuse? Would he have been a sitting president then or merely an ex?

    Agree with this.  And don’t forget, Al Gore is the godfather of rendition (sending suspected terrorists to friendly countries for “enhanced” interrogation).  According to Richard Clarke’s book, Gore flew back sooner than planned from a foreign trip when he got wind of a White House meeting to discuss the proposed policy.  When White House counsel objected saying the policy would be illegal, Gore’s response is “that’s why we need to do it!”.  He won the day.

    The masseuse incident is alleged to have occurred in 2006.

    • #36
  7. Chris Campion Coolidge
    Chris Campion
    @ChrisCampion

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Chris Campion: Which means it’s interesting, but ultimately meaningless…

    One doesn’t learn from history without serious examination, does one?

    It’s the difference between learning and doing something different next time.  What lessons are you drawing from these races that means you’ll make a change in your life tomorrow?  Anything?

    Not sure any of us are going to run the next campaign so as to not make the mistakes of, what, every president since Willie to Donnie?

     

    • #37
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.