# The Democratic party has rejected Clintonism **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 14, 2016, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172 "2016-04-14T11:18:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/21 "2016-04-14T16:11:12Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > Breaking news: the 1980s were different than the 1960s. > > More breaking news: the 1960s were different than the 1940s. OTOH, the present is almost exactly like the '90s, only with cooler phones and more wars. ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/22 "2016-04-14T16:14:47Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Well obviously they are more to the right of where the Dems used to be, that was the whole point. It was in response to “Old Republicans” winning elections. Indeed, and “Old Democrats” getting destroyed in Presidential elections in 1984 and 1988. Clinton tacked a new way and made Democrats somewhat relevant again in Presidential politics. Anyways, I think people do tend to forget that Clinton attempted universal health care and gays openly serving in the military in his first two years. The massive pushback from not only the Republicans, but also his own party, forced him to triangulate even more. After all, politics is the art of the possible, and at that time those things weren’t possible. I do think there is more Clinton in Obama than most people realize. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/23 "2016-04-14T16:19:20Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Do me a favor and list the top 10 of Clinton’s policy achievements during his Presidency and tell me which are actively refuted by the current form of the Democratic Party. Please do not focus on refutations by activists and Sanders’ failing bid for the Presidential nomination. I am talking about the Democratic Party. Show me which of these are undergoing active opposition by the party. > > To other people thinking of participating in this thread: _ **please do not click on the link** _. It furthers the career of yet another talking head who writes opinion pieces for their controversial click bait value. To give you an idea of how intellectually bankrupt Matt Bai is, he was part of a round table on Meet The Press last weekend. I ask you to trust me that there was no analysis or anything of intellectual interest in the article. Just go to Wikipedia, clearly Matt Bai didn’t. well said. I think one can say some “progressives” reject the Clintons, but the vast majority of the party doesn’t. I say “some” progressives because not all progressives engage in the presentism that those who dishonour the Clinton legacy do. Also, progressives are rising in the party ranks vs. moderates (like myself.) But centrists love the Clintons and their first presidency, myself included. The OP ought to remember that the Dems are still a bigger tent than the GOP. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/24 "2016-04-14T16:22:35Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Apart from Sanders, Warren and such, the pols have not rejected it. The Establishment has not rejected it. > > [But the base has.](http://www.salon.com/2016/04/14/hey_democrats_stop_gloating_your_party_is_imploding_right_before_your_eyes_too/) And yet, Hillary is winning the primaries, which I have to assume includes a large portion of the Democratic base. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/25 "2016-04-14T16:32:37Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > And yet, Hillary is winning the primaries, which I have to assume includes a large portion of the Democratic base. I think the “white portion of the base” would be an accurate description. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/26 "2016-04-14T16:35:14Z")
Clintonism has never been accepted by the Democratic Party at large, but the Clintons have been. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/27 "2016-04-14T16:40:55Z")
> [@DerekMichaels00](#): > > I think the “white portion of the base” would be an accurate description. Not really. Clinton supporters skew darker and older while Sanders are lighter and younger. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/28 "2016-04-14T16:43:56Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Not really. Clinton supporters skew darker and older while Sanders are lighter and younger. that’s what I was saying: the white portion of the Democratic “base” has rejected the Clintons, and gone with Sanders. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/29 "2016-04-14T16:54:18Z")
> [@DerekMichaels00](#): > > I think the “white portion of the base” would be an accurate description. I am not sure what you mean. The black portion of the base isn’t voting in the primaries? Edit: and reading above, you think that’s why it’s even close right now? If a larger part of the black Dem base was turning out Clinton would be creaming Sanders? Do you have numbers to support that? ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/30 "2016-04-14T17:06:33Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > I am not sure what you mean. The black portion of the base isn’t voting in the primaries? > > Edit: and reading above, you think that’s why it’s even close right now? If a larger part of the black Dem base was turning out Clinton would be creaming Sanders? Do you have numbers to support that? Hillary is winning the overall popular vote 58-40. Bernie carries white progressives, Hillary gets non-whites, and moderate/centrist Dem whites and the few conservative white Dems left. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/31 "2016-04-14T17:09:07Z")
> [@DerekMichaels00](#): > > that’s what I was saying: the white portion of the Democratic “base” has rejected the Clintons, and gone with Sanders. They’re more inclined to go with Sanders in the primaries, but I don’t think that means they’ve rejected Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/32 "2016-04-14T17:09:13Z")
> [@DerekMichaels00](#): > > Hillary is winning the overall popular vote 58-40. Bernie carries white progressives, Hillary gets non-whites, and moderate/centrist Dem whites and the few conservative white Dems left. Just curious, assuming that Hillary wins the nomination, for whom do you predict the white progressives will vote for in November? My money is on Hillary. So she’ll get her primary voters plus most of Sanders’. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/33 "2016-04-14T17:31:19Z")
White progressives may have “rejected Clintonism” in numbers greater than the average (not that they all have) and white progressives are the primary demographic of Salon. This doesn’t translate to the Democratic base as a whole rejecting anything. Related in a sense: [Higher Voter Turnout Alone is Unlikely to Change the Outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election](http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/higher-voter-turnout-alone-is-unlikely-to-change-the-outcome-of-the-2016-presidential-election/). > [@](#): > > Evidence from the 2012 American National Election Study does not support claims by either Republican or Democratic candidates that increasing turnout in the 2016 presidential election would give a big advantage to one side or the other. This evidence shows that marginal nonvoters, the type most likely to be turned out in a high-turnout election like that for president, were considerably younger, less white, poorer, and less religious than voters. They were also more supportive of activist government and, at least in 2012, more likely to favor the Democratic candidate for president prior to the election. Despite these differences, however, adding marginal nonvoters would have had only very small effects on the overall makeup and political outlook of the electorate. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/34 "2016-04-14T18:33:05Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > 1. Gay policy-DADT, DADT was a stepping stone. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/35 "2016-04-14T18:45:58Z")
> [@DerekMichaels00](#): > > that’s what I was saying: the white portion of the Democratic “base” has rejected the Clintons, and gone with Sanders. Nope. A majority of the white portion _under 35_ has rejected the Clintons, the ones who were at oldest teens during the Clinton administration. ALL other demographics are in Hillary’s favor. Every one. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/36 "2016-04-15T00:47:26Z")
> [@DerekMichaels00](#): > > that’s what I was saying: the white portion of the Democratic “base” has rejected the Clintons, and gone with Sanders. As has been said, there’s more to the Democratic base than upper middle class white Millennial progressives. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/37 "2016-04-15T01:23:06Z")
Brainfart. All other demographics but 18-24 are for Hillary. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/38 "2016-04-15T04:40:53Z")
**adaher** has finally done it! Proof positive that Dems winning means they are losing. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/39 "2016-04-15T06:34:42Z")
Funny, I see very little but conservative victories during the Clinton years. Heck, I’ll take Democrats winning elections from now until 2300 if it means Clintonian policies. You know what the difference is between Clintonism and Republicanism? One is smart conservatism and the other is dumb conservatism. If that’s the argument we’re going to have every election, then liberals are an irrelevancy. Which they were until like, yesterday. IT’s time to drive them back into their holes. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/40 "2016-04-15T06:46:41Z")
Sorry, **adaher.** Ted Cruz & most of his Republican cronies are Conservatives. (Too bad. Wm F Buckley was a loon but not stupid.) Some Democrats are _more_ liberal than the Clintons, but all of your pals consider them Evil Liberals. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172.md?page=3)