I've often heard that the impeachment of Bubba cost Al Gore the election because the cloud of scandal hung over the White House. However, I'm not sure this narrative is actually valid. Polls showed voters liked Bubba and results he was delivering on the economy, the budget and foreign policy, but were disgusted by his personal conduct. So they liked his policies but not his behavior. But Al Gore was de facto offering that: Continue Clinton policies but without scandals. Nobody ever suggested he played a role in Clinton's wrongdoings, not even the Republicans went after Gore for this. If anything, Gore was more liberal than Clinton what may have cost him some support in southern states and Appalachia that had backed the Democratic ticket in 1992 and 1996.
Agreed; in reality, this was Americans' general consensus on the matter: Clinton was a good president, though his behaviour in the case was deplorable. He deserved a censure, but nothing more. Impeachment was unnecessary, as he was a good president in other ways. In reality, the GOP impeaching a popular president actually backfired on them, because in backlash to the GOP's response, voters actually rewarded Clinton during his second midterm with more seats in Congress, the first time it had happened since 1822 and the second and last time nationally.
