Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: sockhead
Mind-boggling to think that Hillary’s thesis would have been devastating to the Clintons in the 90s. Today, it’s not even an issue. The extreme left has gained a lot of ground.

In all fairness, I don't agree with that. I remember that election pretty clearly, and I don't think it would have been much of an issue, no matter what she said.

She could have stated in plain language that she had become a Communist, and it would have made no difference to anyone other than dedicated conservatives.

The MSM would have buried it under a lot of excuses and poppycock, and that would have been that.

14 posted on 08/27/2016 8:02:34 PM PDT by Steely Tom (Vote GOP: A Slower Handbasket)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: Steely Tom
She could have stated in plain language that she had become a Communist, and it would have made no difference to anyone other than dedicated conservatives.

I disagree. Hillary was already very controversial in the '92 campaign season. Adding communism to the list of her flaws may have produced a different result. The country was not as firmly divided, and far leftism was definitely not normal like it is today. The news media were nowhere near what they are today, doing what they are doing for Hillary. Ultimately, Perot gave the election to Bill.

20 posted on 08/27/2016 8:15:11 PM PDT by sockhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson