You didn't answer my question: what enabled the sea change that now has almost all major bodies of U.S. government controlled by Republicans?
Revulsion toward Bill Clinton? Really? You give him that much power?
OK, fine. What started the Bill Clinton impeachment? (Clue: www.drudgereport.com).
What was responsible for the defeat of John F'n Kerry? (Clue: www.swiftvets.com)
Other examples abound, you just aren't noticing it.
Given that you're arguing with my answer, I think you know that I did answer your question. ;-) You obviously don't agree with my answer, which is a different issue entirely.
Revulsion toward Bill Clinton? Really? You give him that much power?
You misunderstand. I'm saying that the revulsion (your word), such as it was, was a visceral response to the issues being cheer-led by the MSM. Newt Gingrich got traction by offering a distinct difference.
What was responsible for the defeat of John F'n Kerry? (Clue: www.swiftvets.com)
How about ... John F'n Kerry himself? He was and is a ponderous, obvious fake. Swiftvets certainly didn't hurt matters, but I think the vast majority of voters never went to the site to check the claims, nor did they see the ads. They probably did hear the controversy about the ads, to the effect that "somebody is calling Kerry a liar about his war record." Given that most didn't trust him anyway, the controversy merely strengthened their distrust. I seriously doubt most people outside of FR and like-minded places know any real details of the controversy.
Other examples abound, you just aren't noticing it.
I'm just realistic about most people: they're a lot less informed, and are less interested in becoming informed, than you seem to think they are.
Other examples abound, you just aren't noticing it
I notice a lot of things -- and I can make pretty good predictions about public opion by assuming that people go with gut feel about things they're not really following.