• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky? (1 Viewer)

Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?


  • Total voters
    44
Clinton was a good to very good president, but he brought great shame to the office. Bill is to the presidency what Pete Rose did to baseball.
 
He showed what a nation can do when a Republican Congress chooses to work with, not just against, a Democratic president. But the outstanding '90s economy wasn't all him.
 
Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?

Considering the democrats have spent the whole primary disavowing all of Bill's accomplishments I dont think many will think his terms were good at all.
 
Clinton was a good to very good president, but he brought great shame to the office. Bill is to the presidency what Pete Rose did to baseball.
I like that analogy.


He showed what a nation can do when a Republican Congress chooses to work with, not just against, a Democratic president. But the outstanding '90s economy wasn't all him.
No, the dot-com boom was not his doing. In that sense he did get lucky for being in the right place at the right time. But, I give him serious kudos for what he did do with the dot-com boom... he did nothing.

That is not a back-handed compliment. That is a serious and sincere compliment. The man has a huge ego, and like any big-time politician they usually cannot resist putting their own fingerprint on everything so they can take credit for it. He resisted the chance to do so, let it boom on its own, and still got credit for it. That's masterful, IMO.

Sometimes the best governing is when you don't govern.
 
I thought Clinton was a sell out. The only way he got things passed was to sell out the "little people". And the only reason he got re-elected was out of sympathy over the right wing witch hunt. The dot.com bubble was responsible for the good economy...not Clinton. I really can't think of anything remarkable that he did for the country. If it wasn't for the right wing spectacle and disrespect for the country....I probably would've voted for Dole.
 
I actually think he did some pretty bad stuff, and he only got lucky in the sense that he had left office by the time we started seeing the true impact.

I have long held that history will be much more negative about Clinton than it was during his presidency. And we're just starting to see the first signs of that.
 
A lot of both, and he was also a majorly flawed President.

A complicated guy he is.
 
Last edited:
I actually think he did some pretty bad stuff, and he only got lucky in the sense that he had left office by the time we started seeing the true impact.

I have long held that history will be much more negative about Clinton than it was during his presidency. And we're just starting to see the first signs of that.

His Bozo "ending welfare as we know it" and his even more Bozo "sure, let the bankers do what ever the **** they want" rank up there in the "bad stuff" department. Over the years it has become more clear how much he contributed to the F'ed up "justice system", I might soon include this with the other two mentioned.

All in all Clinton is a good argument for NOT having a wannabe policy wonk in the POTUS chair.

Carter even more so.
 
Last edited:
Clinton was a good to very good president, but he brought great shame to the office. Bill is to the presidency what Pete Rose did to baseball.

I am going to have to disagree, Tricky Dicky has that dubious distinction.
 
His Bozo "ending welfare as we know it" and his even more Bozo "sure, let the bankers do what ever the **** they want" rank up there in the "bad stuff" department. Over the years it has become more clear how much he contributed to the F'ed up "justice system", I might soon include this with the other two mentioned.

All in all Clinton is a good argument for NOT having a wannabe policy wonk in the POTUS chair.

Carter even more so.

If you don't want a bad president than why do you support the biggest idiot to ever likely get the nomination for the republican party? You know, the orange wacko?
 
Clinton was a good to very good president, but he brought great shame to the office. Bill is to the presidency what Pete Rose did to baseball.

Pete Rose has been treated unfairly by Baseball, couldn't you have used the Black Sox Scandal instead?
 
I'd say both. Very few people would say things for them were terrible under Clinton. He inherited a relatively solid economy and built on it with a GOP congress. He also got extremely lucky as the 90s saw a gigantic tech boom that hasn't slowed down.
 
If you don't want a bad president than why do you support the biggest idiot to ever likely get the nomination for the republican party? You know, the orange wacko?

Let's avoid turning yet another thread into the subject of "The alleged flaws of one Hawkeye10", MKay?

Besides, I have answered this question at length and repeatedly.

Seriously.
 
You mean the other major gambling controversy? :roll:

There was never any evidence that Pete Rose had anything to do with throwing a game, the White Sox did. He never should have been banned for life.
 
Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?

He was an average president who was fortunate enough to be in office during the rise of the internet. It has been quite a while since we had a great president. Perhaps not since Lincoln.
 
As a president, he was saved by having a Republican Congress for most of his administration. If first two years when he was raising taxes and trying to socialize medicine was heading to disaster. As a human being, a man, he was a disaster.
 
I grew up watching Reds baseball, I thought Rose was the greatest. As I got older and learned more about Rose I was very disappointed in him. He was great on the field but brought shame in his actions.
Pete Rose has been treated unfairly by Baseball, couldn't you have used the Black Sox Scandal instead?
 
I grew up watching Reds baseball, I thought Rose was the greatest. As I got older and learned more about Rose I was very disappointed in him. He was great on the field but brought shame in his actions.

Hmmm, maybe we need a Pete Rose thread.

I will think about it.
 
Clinton was a good to very good president, but he brought great shame to the office. Bill is to the presidency what Pete Rose did to baseball.

Actually cheating on your wife is much more the rule than the exception when it comes to U.S. Presidents. What made Bill exceptional was the way it was handled by his opposition. Bill Clinton marked the end of us treating Presidents as sacred symbols of our patriotism. His unprecedented prosecution for purely personal indiscretions paved the way for the harmful partisanship that has marked the new millennium. Thank-you Republicans for weakening our nation forever. The irony is that it weakened the GOP even more.
 
Last edited:
Was Bill Clinton truly a good/great President, or did he just get lucky?

he got lucky twice. he benefited technology revolution that led to affordable personal computers and the internet. And when the GOP took over congress after the 94 midterms and pushed welfare reform, if his handlers had not stopped him from vetoing welfare reform a third time, he would not have been elected to a second term. He finally got the message and moved towards the center with the mea culpa: "The days of big government are over". He did not mean it, but the voters bought it.
 
Clinton was a good to very good president, but he brought great shame to the office. Bill is to the presidency what Pete Rose did to baseball.

Except that Bill Clinton did so at the very beginning. At least Pete Rose screwed the pooch late in his career.
 
Much like how old man Bush throws his footwear at the TV when Trump is on I did it when Clinton would hold Town Halls and then invite 9 year olds up in stage to give us a lecture on stuff like US Nuclear Armament Policy.

Using interns as CIGAR humidors was not his only major flaw.
 
Last edited:
Let's avoid turning yet another thread into the subject of "The alleged flaws of one Hawkeye10", MKay?

Besides, I have answered this question at length and repeatedly.

Seriously.

That is not an attack on you, nor has it anything to do with the flaws of anyone except Terrible Trump. All I just wanted to say is that, how flawed Clinton (Billy boy) might have been, he is still 1000 times more qualified, sane and presidential that the Umpa Lumpa you support will ever be.

FYI, my last post was mean to show the disconnect in the claims you made about Clinton and the reality that you clearly support Devious Donald, who is a very flawed candidate, if not the most flawed candidate of the past 50 years.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom