Should the Democratic Party distance itself from Hillary Clinton?

[Higgins]

What do you guys think?

As a Democrat, I think Hillary should be persona non grata. She's toxic to the brand. LBJ and Nixon were never again invited to their party's conventions after they left office - and their respective parties acted as if they didn't exist. We should do the same with Hillary and Bill Clinton, and focus on Obama's legacy. The Clintons are both an embarrassment, and represent the opposite of what the Democratic Party should be.

[Higgins]

The party didn't distance itself from Gore in 2000.

Gore was much less cringey and much less of a self-absorbed embarrassment.

[Higgins]

The party didn't distance itself from Gore in 2000.

It was Nader's fault that Gore lost, so he got a Pass.

Obviously the democratic party should divorce itself completely from Hillary Clinton. She is the most hated nominee of either major party, aside from Trump himself, in modern history.

No.

Yes. Gore wasn't nearly as horrible a candidate as Hillary.

[Higgins]

Yes. They served their role just fine in the 90's when the Democrats had to move to the center to win.

Did they? Judging by the 1994 results, Bill's lack of legislative accomplishment, and the fact that they made George W. Bush seem like a fresh alternative, I wouldn't say they were the best choice for Democrats in the 1990s. In fact, their sleaze was disastrous for Democrats during that whole period and made rebuilding impossible until they were put on the shelf for a while. For example, in 1996 all the polls were showing Democrats were easily going to retake the House - then the Chinese fundraising scandal came out.

Meh, we can play a bunch of hypothetical what if scenarios all day and never agree on anything (or more importantly, test it out). The past has already occurred and in the history books. It's best to actually analyze the past and try to learn from it.

The fact of the matter is that 1980 ushered in a GOP-Southern Democrat alliance to pass an agenda that would define (and largely still defines) this era of politics and shaped our macroeconomy in a way that reversed trends which had been ongoing for decades. A moderate southern Democrat was an obvious follow up to win the Presidential election after the more liberal Democrats like Dukakis and Mondale failed to unseat the Republicans. And a moderate southern Democrat in Bill Clinton represented the ideological wing of the Party that got Reagan's agenda passed so of course he was a natural continuation of the Reagan Revolution.

And spare me the talks about Nixon (who got treated like crap by the Democratic congress of his day) or Carter (who was incompetent and couldn't work with congress). They didn't have the ability to work with their congresses to get the revolutionary measures Reagan got through in the 80's. Their incrementalism was only a sign of Reagan coming and not worthy of being analyzed as the start of the neoliberal era.

LBJ felt that FDR's court packing scheme is what brought about the Southern Dem-GOP alliance.

[Higgins]

Nixon at one point gave everything the Democrats could've wanted in his healthcare proposal without losing his base and the Democrats still rejected it.

I know you like to talk about parallels between political alignments, and this brings me to one that you'll definitely find interesting: Obama gave the Republicans everything they could've wanted in his healthcare proposal and the Republicans still rejected it.

Two different situations. Nixon gave his healthcare proposal which had everything in his State of the Union for 1974. By that time, he had very very little political capitol left and no Democrats willing to work on him with anything besides helping him out the door.

[Higgins]

Nixon at one point gave everything the Democrats could've wanted in his healthcare proposal without losing his base and the Democrats still rejected it.

I know you like to talk about parallels between political alignments, and this brings me to one that you'll definitely find interesting: Obama gave the Republicans everything they could've wanted in his healthcare proposal and the Republicans still rejected it.

Two different situations. Nixon gave his healthcare proposal which had everything in his State of the Union for 1974. By that time, he had very very little political capitol left and no Democrats willing to work on him with anything besides helping him out the door.

Ted Kennedy would go on to say his biggest mistake in his political life was rejecting Nixon's healthcare proposal. The situation may have been slightly different than Obama, but the hostility Democrats had towards Nixon at the time caused many to look back with regret at the opportunities they missed.

The bolded seems to be fading from history in favor of the "Southern Democrats were right-wingers and more conservative than a lot of Republicans" and "Nixon was actually pretty liberal muh EPA" narratives.  The fact is, Democrats hated Nixon much more than they hated Reagan (21st Century attitudes aside), and many Southern Democrats led the charge for his impeachment.

Sam Ervin

[Higgins]

LBJ and Nixon were never again invited to their party's conventions after they left office

To be fair, LBJ didn't live very long after he left office.

the 1972 convention pretended he didn't exist. They even removed his photograph from their portraits of Democratic Presidents of the past as if he didn't happen. That was within his lifetime.

[Higgins]

Anyone other than Clinton, and O'Malley, could've beaten Donald Trump. The fact that the election was as close as it is a testament to how poor a candidate she was, and how embarrassing she is to the party. She let the American people down. Persona non grata she should be.