Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Was 43% a mandate for Clinton in '92?

Posted on 11/05/2004 9:24:13 AM PST by DavidThomas

I wonder if the Left was denying Clinton a mandate when he took control of both houses of Congress in 1992?


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 1992; clinton; mandate; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 11/05/2004 9:24:14 AM PST by DavidThomas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas
If memory serves, the NY Times headline the next day was:

"MANDATE FOR CHANGE"

2 posted on 11/05/2004 9:25:43 AM PST by The G Man (Are Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein better off now then they were 4 years ago?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas

I made the silly mistake of voting for Clinton's stalking horse, Pee-rot. Of course, GHWB, gave me little reason to vote for him.


3 posted on 11/05/2004 9:26:49 AM PST by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The G Man

Bubba: "Hey, man that's a lie! I never touched that chick?" Mandate for oral sex is more like it, ay?


4 posted on 11/05/2004 9:26:51 AM PST by RexBeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas
You obviously don't know the MSM rules. A Democrat win is a mandate for change. A Republican win is divisive and requires the winner to reach out to heal the liberals wounds.
5 posted on 11/05/2004 9:27:28 AM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1270578/posts

That is all you need to show them.

Plus, point out that Bush had 2.51 million sq mi., while Kerry had 511,700 million sq mi.


6 posted on 11/05/2004 9:27:34 AM PST by jcb8199
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas

His mandate was pretty much crushed when the Republicans seized Congress in 1994. Republicans had a mandate - he didn't.


7 posted on 11/05/2004 9:28:23 AM PST by mabelkitty (Blackwell for Governor in 2006!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RexBeach

Exactly right, Rex! It was a mandate for lying genitals. Clinochio's certainly weren't made of teflon.


8 posted on 11/05/2004 9:29:28 AM PST by MahaMarty (YOU LOSE. WE WON! EXCUSE UN WHILE WE GO KICK SOME TERRORIST BUTT!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas

They sure thought so when he implemented don't ask, don't tell in the military.


9 posted on 11/05/2004 9:31:24 AM PST by stopillegalimmigration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas
TIME Magazine 11/16/02:

"If Clinton is to fulfill his mandate for change, he will have to be honest about uncomfortable truths and brave in making tough choices."

10 posted on 11/05/2004 9:32:23 AM PST by The G Man (Are Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein better off now then they were 4 years ago?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas

Nice mandate.


11 posted on 11/05/2004 9:34:10 AM PST by Huck (Any man, gay or straight, can marry a woman. That's equal treatment under the law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Clinton should be worshiping the ground that the MSM walks on -- if it were not for them, he not only would have been tried, and thrown out of the Presidency, but he would be in Federal prison for China-Gate.

Think about it. If the MSM had told the truth, he would have been history.


12 posted on 11/05/2004 9:37:51 AM PST by EagleUSA (W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: The G Man

The local paper the next morning actually said Clinton wins in landslide. Un huh. So he carried 32 states. They failed to point out he won all but one of them with less than 50%, and many he took with under 40%!

Local TV guy the next day actually said since Clinton received a whopping 42% in CT, our state's voters gave him an overwhelming mandate for change. What a laugh. 58% of voters chose someone other than Clinton, and every congressional incumbent won again. People in this state wanted the status quo, if you ask me.


13 posted on 11/05/2004 9:37:53 AM PST by TNCMAXQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MahaMarty

Good one, Marty!

Remember, "Bubba" didn't have sex with that woman..."Mr. Winky" did!

LOL!


14 posted on 11/05/2004 9:40:32 AM PST by RexBeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas
The answer is a resounding YES!! The alternate universe applies when a Democrat WINS any election. If it was with 512 votes more for GORE in 2k it would have been described SOMEHOW someway as a MANDATE for the Dims, just as the NY Times proved with the MANDATE FOR CHANGE headline when the First Black POTUS got 43% of the vote.
15 posted on 11/05/2004 9:42:06 AM PST by PISANO (Never Forget 911!! & 911's First Heroes "Beamer, Glick , Bingham & Bennett.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas

Should Condi Rice be elected in '08, then we would see a man date, for a change...


16 posted on 11/05/2004 9:42:55 AM PST by mikrofon (Dear JF'nK: your 15 mos. of fame are over)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mabelkitty

"...His mandate was pretty much crushed when the Republicans seized Congress in 1994. Republicans had a mandate - he didn't...."

The administration and the GOP should take a lesson from Clinton's first term debacle. Bush needs to prioritize his policy goals and pick his spots. My preference would be for strong forward movement on life issues and entitlement reform and more conciliation on foreign policy goals, with domestic and European enemies. This will please the social conservative while appeasing moderates. We need to make the tent bigger without alienating the newly motivated GOP voters. It won't be easy.


17 posted on 11/05/2004 9:44:58 AM PST by irish_links
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: irish_links

I'm not going to worry about it.
If I had all the answers, I'd be President.
I'm quite certain they know what they are doing.


18 posted on 11/05/2004 9:46:45 AM PST by mabelkitty (Blackwell for Governor in 2006!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas
Was 43% a mandate for Clinton in '92?

You're kidding, right?

The MSM gives all Democrats a mandate, no matter how thin the victory (like Clinton '92) and gives all Republicans advice to "reach out to the Democrats" (i.e., turn left) no matter how huge the landslide (Reagan '84).

The MSM is completely shameless.

19 posted on 11/05/2004 9:46:47 AM PST by Semi Civil Servant (This space for sale.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DavidThomas
Two points re. "mandate" and the 2004 election:

1. It was very close. Take a look at the numbers on this map.
W won OH (20EV) by a margin of 136K,
W lost NH (4EV) by 10K,
W lost WI (10EV) by 11K,
W lost OR (7EV) by 67K,
W won NM (5EV) by 8K,
W won IA (7EV) by 13K

In these "close states," President Bush's net was +69,000 popular votes and +11 Electoral votes.

2. I hate to speculate about something that did not happen, but what impact did MSM bias have on the election? What would have been the benefit to President Bush if the coverage had been balanced? Would he have had 55-percent of the popular vote and an additional (minimum of) 88 EVs (OR, WI, and NH) ??

.

My second point is really my main point and my conclusion is that this election is really a "mandate" - but look how close it was. The numbers (286 / 252 EVs) don't appear to say so.

With the influence of the MSM, the reality is that Republicans need to get national "mandates" in order simply squeek out a victory.

Comments?

20 posted on 11/05/2004 9:55:27 AM PST by kinsman redeemer (the real enemy seeks to devour what is good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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