Lewinskygate never happened

[2952-0-0]

Dems sweep Congress in 08, Gore wins landslide in 2000, and then we have everything else Gore would have done.

[opebo]

If this truly made a difference, then the US is more hopelessly prudish than I thought.  But I suppose you're right.  If only we could bring back the days when we had a sexually normal male in office - instead we're stuck with this creepy anhedonic jesus-freak.

[Ben.]

Dems sweep Congress in 08...

Don’t you mean 98?

Personally I’m not sure there would have been that much difference, though a big plank the Republican’s used in 1998 and 2000 wouldn’t have been there, Gore would probably have won but not in a landslide there where bound to have been plenty of “Reagan Democrats” who voted for Bush on the basis of “restoring honour to the white house” who may not have otherwise. As for “Sweeping Congress” I doubt it, Scotty Baesler would have beat Bunning and Mike Coles might have beaten Coverdell but these where probably the only races where the impeachment might have helped the GOP hang on, in many ways the impeachment was not important though in close races it did have an effect and without Gore might well have won firstly because he wouldn’t have distances himself from Clinton and secondly becomes he would have won round more of the “values voters”.       

[Wakie]

Honestly, we would probably STILL have an independent counsel trying to find something on Clinton.

If you remember, the OIC was created to investigate Whitewater.  When the original "investigator" had completed his investigatino and was about to clear Clinton the GOP cried foul, threw a hissy fit, and demanded someone new be appointed.  And that's how we got Ken Starr.  And Starr stayed on the job UNTIL he could find something (eventually the Lewinsky scandal).

Clinton's affair with her didn't happend until AFTER Ken Starr had been appointed to the OIC.  And sex ain't a crime.  It was only after the OIC illegally expanded its authority that enabled a crime to occur (perjury).  It really was one of the worst cases of entrapment ever.

So ... if the Republicans never throw a hissy fit and appoint Starr to the OIC no crime occurs because no opportunity exists for Clinton to perjure himself.

[skybridge]

Anyone in his/her right mind will you know how contradictory this "moral values" issue is. However, it's just close-minded to deny its existence--unfortunately.

[Josh/Devilman88]

If this truly made a difference, then the US is more hopelessly prudish than I thought.  But I suppose you're right.  If only we could bring back the days when we had a sexually normal male in office - instead we're stuck with this creepy anhedonic jesus-freak.

You know we have a very good President. Clinton was only good for one thing... Cheating on his wife. At least Bush stands on something. And how dare you call Bush a Jesus- freak. Maybe I should call you Devil-Freak.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

If this truly made a difference, then the US is more hopelessly prudish than I thought.  But I suppose you're right.  If only we could bring back the days when we had a sexually normal male in office - instead we're stuck with this creepy anhedonic jesus-freak.

You know we have a very good President. Clinton was only good for one thing... Cheating on his wife. At least Bush stands on something. And how dare you call Bush a Jesus- freak. Maybe I should call you Devil-Freak.

yes, Clinton was only good for one thing, the economy was so much worse under him and our foreign relations were so much more strained.

[muon2]

Dems sweep Congress in 08...

Don’t you mean 98?

Personally I’m not sure there would have been that much difference, though a big plank the Republican’s used in 1998 and 2000 wouldn’t have been there, Gore would probably have won but not in a landslide there where bound to have been plenty of “Reagan Democrats” who voted for Bush on the basis of “restoring honour to the white house” who may not have otherwise. As for “Sweeping Congress” I doubt it, Scotty Baesler would have beat Bunning and Mike Coles might have beaten Coverdell but these where probably the only races where the impeachment might have helped the GOP hang on, in many ways the impeachment was not important though in close races it did have an effect and without Gore might well have won firstly because he wouldn’t have distances himself from Clinton and secondly becomes he would have won round more of the “values voters”.       

I think your points are right on. The 1998 races would have been much the same. The president's party has a hard time winning seats in an off year, Bush did it in 2002 with a huge investment in personal campaign time. Democrats gained in 1998, in part from seats gained in 1994 returning to their natural party, and in part from an impeachment backlash. Without a galvanizing issue, a handful of races would at most have been affected.

In 2000, Gore wins FL and NH if there was no impeachment. Clinton fatigue was a factor for enough voters to certainly switch those two states. In addition OH, TN, and AR could have been close enough to become toss-ups.

[MaC]

History repeats itself, Gore rides on Clinton's coattails, gets elected, but however gets caught up in his own scandal, probably relating to 9-11.  Gore is impeached, and Lieberman takes office.  It goes fairly well for Liberman on a fiscal and social standing, but he gets caught up in foreign matters, mainly due to the fact people in the middle east hate him because he's Jewish.  The foreign politics don't hit him until he gets re-elected in 2004.  Since he has bad foreign polcy, the Dems are at a disadvantage in 2008, but they're smart enough to go with an Edwards/Bayh ticket.  George W Bush makes a Nixon-like comeback and wins with a very narrow margin, although nobody complains he stole the election

[Moooooo]

yes, Clinton was only good for one thing, the economy was so much worse under him and our foreign relations were so much more strained.

You forgot that Clinton was responsible for 9/11 and let Osama Bin Laden go.  [/sarcasm]

[dazzleman]

yes, Clinton was only good for one thing, the economy was so much worse under him and our foreign relations were so much more strained.

You forgot that Clinton was responsible for 9/11 and let Osama Bin Laden go.  [/sarcasm]

Actually, that's true to a large extent.  Clinton's national security advisor called him once while he was playing golf to tell him that they had closed in on bin Laden and to get permission to kill him.  Clinton didn't want to interrupt his game, and refused to take the call.  By the time he spoke to his national security advisor, it was too late.  For Clinton, the whole presidency was about his ego.  Nothing more.

I think that without the Lewinsky scandal, Gore would have been elected president.  The economy was still doing well, and there would have been no compelling reason for enough voters to vote out the incumbent party.  Gore, as we have seen, is a nutjob, so I shudder to think what would have happened to the country under Gore.

[Defarge]

yes, Clinton was only good for one thing, the economy was so much worse under him and our foreign relations were so much more strained.

You forgot that Clinton was responsible for 9/11 and let Osama Bin Laden go.  [/sarcasm]

Actually, that's true to a large extent.  Clinton's national security advisor called him once while he was playing golf to tell him that they had closed in on bin Laden and to get permission to kill him.  Clinton didn't want to interrupt his game, and refused to take the call.  By the time he spoke to his national security advisor, it was too late.  For Clinton, the whole presidency was about his ego.  Nothing more.

I think that without the Lewinsky scandal, Gore would have been elected president.  The economy was still doing well, and there would have been no compelling reason for enough voters to vote out the incumbent party.  Gore, as we have seen, is a nutjob, so I shudder to think what would have happened to the country under Gore.

Really? Do you have a link?  I've never heard that story before, even from my extreme right wing friends.

[Peter]

Much more importantly, Justice Stevens would have been able to retire under a Democratic President, thus enabling a true liberal lion to be appointed to the Court to balance the intellect that is Justice Scalia. Stevens would probably have retired in the last couple of years of Clinton (he hadn't been able to because of Lewinskygate) or  in the opening years of Gore. Longer term, it would have pushed the Court towards a more liberal mindset with obviously one young, liberal Justice replacing Stevens, and the likely moderates replacing semi-conservative O'Connor and conservative Rehnquist.

Could have changed the face of the country for literally 30 years.