Why the Elections and Administrations of Obama and Clinton Are Very Similar

[libertpaulian]

Both Presidents were young when they were first elected and first took office (both in their 40s).

Both have charisma.

Both were running for President during economic recessions that occurred under a Republican administration.

Both were propelled to national fame when they gave speeches during their party's conventions four years prior.  Well, in Clinton's case, it was more infamy than fame, haha.  A mere four years later, both would be elected President.

Both ran as anti-establishment candidates that wanted to provide political and social change.

Both won Electoral College landslides in both their election and re-election years.

During the year they were elected to their first terms, there were controversial gay rights ballot initiatives that passed, but would eventually be struck down by the Supreme Court.  In 1992, when Clinton was elected, Colorado passed Amendment 2.  It effectively nullified any existing county and municipality non-discrimination or gay rights ordinances and prohibited any other locality from enacting such laws.  That would go on to be the SCOTUS case known as Romer v. Evans.  In 2008, California passed Proposition 8, which banned marriage equality in the state.  That would go on to be the SCOTUS case known as Hollingsworth v. Perry.  

In both 1992 and 2008, the election was a referendum on someone named Bush and whether or not their policies should continue.

Both men would have comfortable Democratic margins in the upcoming Congress that made them optimistic that they'd be able to move their agendas forward.  

Healthcare reform was one of the central tenets of both campaign platforms.

In the first term elections, the past actions of both Democratic candidates were brought to light.  With Clinton, it was pot smoking (I didn't inhale), draft dodging, and extramarital affairs were brought up.  With Obama, it was pot smoking, Jeremiah Wright, and Bill Ayers.

The 1992 and 2008 elections both saw major realignments in the Electoral College.

When both men were running for re-election, they ran against a Republican candidate that had zero personality at all and chose running mates from blue states, hoping to turn said blue states red (Dole chose Kemp from New York; Romney chose Ryan from Wisconsin).

In the year both men were running for election, the Republicans nominated Presidential candidates that they initially hated, but were stuck with and had to support anyway.

The Republican candidates in the re-election years ran horrendous campaigns.

Both Presidents lost their Congresses in mid-term election years.  Clinton lost his in the mid-term of his first term; Obama lost his during the six-year itch.

Free trade agreements have been controversial in both administrations.  Clinton's NAFTA would go on to be panned.  Obama is facing flack over the potential passage of the TPP.

Pretty coincidental, no?

[Ebsy]

jao

[Sumner 1868]

Your forgetting that 1998 and 2014 were very different midterms, both in circumstances and result.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

-There wasn't a recession in '92..just a weak recovery from one

-Voters generally approved of the elder Bush's foreign policy...not so much the younger

-Clinton lost both houses in his first midterm, Obama only lost the House in his first midterm

-Major third-party candidate in '92/'96, not '08/'12

-Clinton defeated an incumbent, Obama won an open seat

-Clinton won by holding his own with white voters, Obama won by virtue of minorities making up a greater segment of the electorate than in the past

-Clinton was a governor, Obama was a senator

-Clinton failed to pass health care reform, Obama succeeded

-Clinton had a decent 6th year midterm election, Obama had a bad one

[Sumner 1868]

-There wasn't a recession in '92..just a weak recovery from one

-Voters generally approved of the elder Bush's foreign policy...not so much the younger

-Clinton lost both houses in his first midterm, Obama only lost the House in his first midterm

-Major third-party candidate in '92/'96, not '08/'12

-Clinton defeated an incumbent, Obama won an open seat

-Clinton won by holding his own with white voters, Obama won by virtue of minorities making up a greater segment of the electorate than in the past

-Clinton was a governor, Obama was a senator

-Clinton failed to pass health care reform, Obama succeeded

-Clinton had a decent 6th year midterm election, Obama had a bad one

Clinton did not win a majority or plurality of white voters. And, it's generally conceded the recession lasted until April 1993. Otherwise, your points are generally correct.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Both Presidents were young when they were first elected and first took office (both in their 40s).

Both have charisma.

Both were running for President during economic recessions that occurred under a Republican administration.

Both were propelled to national fame when they gave speeches during their party's conventions four years prior.  Well, in Clinton's case, it was more infamy than fame, haha.  A mere four years later, both would be elected President.

Both ran as anti-establishment candidates that wanted to provide political and social change.

Both won Electoral College landslides in both their election and re-election years.

During the year they were elected to their first terms, there were controversial gay rights ballot initiatives that passed, but would eventually be struck down by the Supreme Court.  In 1992, when Clinton was elected, Colorado passed Amendment 2.  It effectively nullified any existing county and municipality non-discrimination or gay rights ordinances and prohibited any other locality from enacting such laws.  That would go on to be the SCOTUS case known as Romer v. Evans.  In 2008, California passed Proposition 8, which banned marriage equality in the state.  That would go on to be the SCOTUS case known as Hollingsworth v. Perry.  

In both 1992 and 2008, the election was a referendum on someone named Bush and whether or not their policies should continue.

Both men would have comfortable Democratic margins in the upcoming Congress that made them optimistic that they'd be able to move their agendas forward.  

Healthcare reform was one of the central tenets of both campaign platforms.

In the first term elections, the past actions of both Democratic candidates were brought to light.  With Clinton, it was pot smoking (I didn't inhale), draft dodging, and extramarital affairs were brought up.  With Obama, it was pot smoking, Jeremiah Wright, and Bill Ayers.

The 1992 and 2008 elections both saw major realignments in the Electoral College.

When both men were running for re-election, they ran against a Republican candidate that had zero personality at all and chose running mates from blue states, hoping to turn said blue states red (Dole chose Kemp from New York; Romney chose Ryan from Wisconsin).

In the year both men were running for election, the Republicans nominated Presidential candidates that they initially hated, but were stuck with and had to support anyway.

The Republican candidates in the re-election years ran horrendous campaigns.

Both Presidents lost their Congresses in mid-term election years.  Clinton lost his in the mid-term of his first term; Obama lost his during the six-year itch.

Free trade agreements have been controversial in both administrations.  Clinton's NAFTA would go on to be panned.  Obama is facing flack over the potential passage of the TPP.

Pretty coincidental, no?

Here's one difference Bill Clinton actually Balanced the Budget, Reformed Welfare, had a booming economy, and Worked perfectly with the republicans. Before you say say Obama's congress was worse Clinton had deal with Gingrich who was much more hostile and much tougher then Boehner and Clinton still managed to defeat him

[libertpaulian]

I was referring mostly to the election seasons. 

[Mechaman]

Yes Boehner is a freaking joke.  It is really amazing how he arose to a leadership position for anything much less Speaker of the House.

He is more like an anti-Gingrich at this rate.  Incompetent as hell and being dragged around by the demands of an extremist faction and afraid of his own shadow.  Said extremists likely influenced by the tactics of one Newt Gingrich.

Difference is Gingrich led his party while Boehner is being led by his.

[bobloblaw]

""Both won Electoral College landslides in both their election and re-election years.""

332 EVs is a landslide?

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

-There wasn't a recession in '92..just a weak recovery from one

-Voters generally approved of the elder Bush's foreign policy...not so much the younger

-Clinton lost both houses in his first midterm, Obama only lost the House in his first midterm

-Major third-party candidate in '92/'96, not '08/'12

-Clinton defeated an incumbent, Obama won an open seat

-Clinton won by holding his own with white voters, Obama won by virtue of minorities making up a greater segment of the electorate than in the past

-Clinton was a governor, Obama was a senator

-Clinton failed to pass health care reform, Obama succeeded

-Clinton had a decent 6th year midterm election, Obama had a bad one

Clinton did not win a majority or plurality of white voters. And, it's generally conceded the recession lasted until April 1993. Otherwise, your points are generally correct.

The recession ended in March 1991 according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, but they didn't reach this conclusion until a month after Bush had been defeated (not that it would've made a difference). Either way, the economy wasn't in freefall in 1992 like it was in 2008...just struggling to grow.

Clinton didn't win the white vote, but he was at least competitive...if he had lost it by the margin Obama did with 1990's demographics, he'd be a footnote of history.