# 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:** 4
**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, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/61 "2016-04-15T12:43:35Z")
They’ll craft legislation a Clinton can sign. That’s easy. If it’s favored in opinion polls by 51% or more, President Clinton will sign it. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/62 "2016-04-15T14:11:21Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > you must admit I don’t have to do a damn thing! You’ve made your claim twice. Now back it up: WHAT legislation did the Republican controlled Congress of 95-01 (not '93 like you claimed) pass that the current Congress wouldn’t? And vice-versa. WHAT legislation does the current Congress endorse that a majority in 95-01 would reject? ---
**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 15, 2016, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/63 "2016-04-15T14:32:09Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > I don’t have to do a damn thing! > > You’ve made your claim twice. Now back it up: WHAT legislation did the Republican controlled Congress of 95-01 (not '93 like you claimed) pass that the current Congress wouldn’t? And vice-versa. WHAT legislation does the current Congress endorse that a majority in 95-01 would reject? OK, here are some. The 103rd Congress gave us: Family and Medical Leave Act. Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act Federal Assault Weapons Act From the 104th: HIPAA Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban From the 105th: Workforce Investment Act Does anyone think Ryan or McConnell would touch any of these? ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/64 "2016-04-15T15:48:22Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > OK, here are some. The 103rd Congress gave us: > Family and Medical Leave Act. > Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act > Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act > Federal Assault Weapons Act > > Does anyone think Ryan or McConnell would touch any of these? No because the Republicans were not in charge when these things passed. In fact, President Clinton himself stated that because of these things is why the Dems lost control in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/65 "2016-04-15T16:03:43Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Then what were you talking about? adaher and I were posting about how for 6 years the Republicans passed bills and Clinton signed them and even though he took the credit for those things they still were pretty good. The crime bill wasn’t “pretty good.” The welfare reform wasn’t. DOMA wasn’t. What exactly are you referring to? ---
**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, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/66 "2016-04-15T16:38:56Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > THe party is only different in that they are more divided now, so it’s hard to pass anything without not just Democrats, but liberal Democrats. The Blue Dogs are mostly extinct and the Tea Party is too absolutist. But the majority of the party is still of the Gingrich persuasion, far right but willing to make incremental progress. I guess it must have been some other party willfully obstructing everything Obama has tried to do, over and over and over again. Please. I don’t think even you buy that. ---
**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, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/67 "2016-04-15T16:40:21Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > I don’t have to do a damn thing! > > You’ve made your claim twice. Now back it up: WHAT legislation did the Republican controlled Congress of 95-01 (not '93 like you claimed) pass that the current Congress wouldn’t? And vice-versa. WHAT legislation does the current Congress endorse that a majority in 95-01 would reject? Why even bother asking such a pie-in-the-sky question? ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/68 "2016-04-15T16:50:04Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > The crime bill wasn’t “pretty good.” It wasn’t passed under a Republican controlled Congress. You’re the 2nd person here to Claim it was. If you don’t know your history how can you argue about it? ---
**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 15, 2016, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/69 "2016-04-15T17:00:05Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > No because the Republicans were not in charge when these things passed. In fact, President Clinton himself stated that because of these things is why the Dems lost control in the first place. His last 3 examples, from 104th and 105th Congress, were under a Republican majority though. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/70 "2016-04-15T17:16:21Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > It wasn’t passed under a Republican controlled Congress. You’re the 2nd person here to Claim it was. If you don’t know your history how can you argue about it? Noted. Now, I repeat: Exactly what “pretty good” bills were you referring to, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by Clinton? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/71 "2016-04-15T17:24:10Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > OK, here are some. The 103rd Congress gave us: > > Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act > F > Federal Assault Weapons Act > Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban > F All of these are bad laws, useless and pandering. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/72 "2016-04-15T17:58:20Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > yes it is. Why bother sending him stuff you know he’s going to veto and not get overridden. Are you serious? Republicans can’t manage to pass jack shit out of Congress, and that’s Obama’s fault? I’ll tell you why you bother: it shows voters what they’ll get if they put a Republican President in office starting in 2017. Which, in this scenario, would totally terrify the shit out of most people, which is why Congress doesn’t pass anything. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2016, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/73 "2016-04-15T22:15:07Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Now, I repeat: Exactly what “pretty good” bills were you referring to, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by Clinton? Megan’s Law Food Quality Protection Act Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act Defense of Marriage Act Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 National Highway System Designation Act Just a handful off the top of my head. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/74 "2016-04-17T04:43:35Z")
Vote Clinton, so that she can spend the rest of her life “regretting” everything she did as President. Has she ever done anything in public life that turned out good? ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/75 "2016-04-17T05:05:09Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Megan’s Law > Food Quality Protection Act > Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 > Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act > Defense of Marriage Act > Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 > National Highway System Designation Act > > Just a handful off the top of my head. You think DOMA was a “pretty good” law? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/76 "2016-04-17T05:20:47Z")
The Clintons sure did. Bill made a point of going on radio in the South to tout his support for it. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/77 "2016-04-17T06:38:38Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The Clintons sure did. Bill made a point of going on radio in the South to tout his support for it. Umm, it was passed by a veto proof super majority. wiki: _The 1996 Republican Party platform endorsed DOMA, referencing only Section 2 of the act: “We reject the distortion of [anti-discrimination] laws to cover sexual preference, and we endorse the Defense of Marriage Act to prevent states from being forced to recognize same-sex unions.”[… The bill moved through Congress on a legislative fast track and met with overwhelming approval in both houses of the Republican-controlled Congress. Though his official political position was against same-sex marriage, Clinton criticized DOMA as “unnecessary and divisive”,[26] while his press-secretary called it “gay baiting, plain and simple”.[27][28] However, after Congress had passed the bill with enough votes to override a presidential veto,[28] Clinton signed DOMA. Many years later, he claimed that he did so reluctantly in view of the veto-proof majority, both to avoid associating himself politically with the then-unpopular cause of same-sex marriage, and to defuse momentum for a proposed Federal Amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning same-sex marriage.[28][29] Clinton, who was traveling when Congress acted, signed it into law promptly upon returning to Washington, D.C., on September 21, 1996; he refused to hold a signing ceremony for DOMA and did not allow photographs to be taken of him signing it into law.[30] The White House released a statement in which Clinton said “that the enactment of this legislation should not, despite the fierce and at times divisive rhetoric surrounding it, be understood to provide an excuse for discrimination, violence or intimidation against any person on the basis of sexual orientation”.[30]_ Clinton was\* against \*DOMA. ---
**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 17, 2016, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/78 "2016-04-17T06:52:19Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Umm, it was passed by a veto proof super majority. > wiki: > > _The 1996 Republican Party platform endorsed DOMA, referencing only Section 2 of the act: “We reject the distortion of [anti-discrimination] laws to cover sexual preference, and we endorse the Defense of Marriage Act to prevent states from being forced to recognize same-sex unions.”[… > The bill moved through Congress on a legislative fast track and met with overwhelming approval in both houses of the Republican-controlled Congress. > Though his official political position was against same-sex marriage, Clinton criticized DOMA as “unnecessary and divisive”,[26] while his press-secretary called it “gay baiting, plain and simple”.[27][28] However, after Congress had passed the bill with enough votes to override a presidential veto,[28] Clinton signed DOMA. Many years later, he claimed that he did so reluctantly in view of the veto-proof majority, both to avoid associating himself politically with the then-unpopular cause of same-sex marriage, and to defuse momentum for a proposed Federal Amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning same-sex marriage.[28][29] Clinton, who was traveling when Congress acted, signed it into law promptly upon returning to Washington, D.C., on September 21, 1996; he refused to hold a signing ceremony for DOMA and did not allow photographs to be taken of him signing it into law.[30] The White House released a statement in which Clinton said “that the enactment of this legislation should not, despite the fierce and at times divisive rhetoric surrounding it, be understood to provide an excuse for discrimination, violence or intimidation against any person on the basis of sexual orientation”.[30]_ > > Clinton was\* against \*DOMA. But that doesn’t feed well enough into the irrational Clinton-hate. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/79 "2016-04-17T07:00:35Z")
Only the Clintons have the power to make people believe different things about them depending on who they want to persuade: > **[How Hillary Clinton's and Bernie Sanders' DOMA Revisionism Harms LGBT Rights](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-bernie-sa_b_8388726)** > > What Sanders exposed is a simple truth: Clinton, in an interview on Rachel Maddow last week, revised the history of her husband and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Clinton sure was willing to advertise his support for DOMA where it would help him politically. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172/80 "2016-04-17T15:20:59Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Megan’s Law [No, not pretty good.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan%27s_Law#Criticism) > [@pkbites](#): > > Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act [You can’t be serious.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Responsibility_and_Work_Opportunity_Act#Criticism) > [@pkbites](#): > > Defense of Marriage Act You **really** can’t be serious. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-has-rejected-clintonism/752172.md?page=5)