Subscribe Register Login
Monday, December 11, 2017, 7:12 a.m.

ADVERTISEMENT

Top Picks - Mobile App

OPINION

JOHN BRUMMETT: Truth and the Clintons

By John Brummett

This article was published November 21, 2017 at 4:30 a.m.

In Little Rock on Saturday to celebrate the 25th reunion of the 1992 presidential campaign, the Clintons told a wealth of important truth, cheered by 3,000 in a state that now overwhelmingly rejects and widely detests them as tellers of non-truth.

This story is only available from the Arkansas Online archives. Stories can be purchased individually for $2.95. Click here to search for this story in the archives.

Print Headline: Truth and the Clintons

ADVERTISEMENT

Comments on: JOHN BRUMMETT: Truth and the Clintons

To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.

Subscribe Register Login

You must login to make comments.

Displaying 1 - 10 of 72 total comments

Jump to last page >>

TimberTopper says... November 21, 2017 at 4:57 a.m.

Another good column, John. Perhaps the wisdom and experience of these two could help the party rebuild with new faces and talent.

( | suggest removal )

RBear says... November 21, 2017 at 6:20 a.m.

Yes, it is a good column and doesn't mince words with Clinton's past. Looking back, if the climate today had existed then Clinton probably would not have been president. But we wouldn't have had the growth and prosperity we had during that period nor any of the landmark actions our government undertook. If Clinton had just kept to himself during that period, we would be looking back at a great presidency. Instead, it is marred by an incident with an intern that never should have happened.
...
I agree it's time to move forward. I looked at the reunion this past weekend as an opportunity to reflect on and reminisce about the past, but discuss ways to move forward. I sat in on a few discussions myself about those approaches, some that could really reshape elections.
...
Of course, the haters will pounce on this column with all the vitriol they can muster. They offer nothing of substance but a hatred for a successful president and a candidate who scored more votes in our nation than any other candidate except another Democrat. Yes, the election is decided by the EC but that victory was razor thin, less than a percentage point and no more votes than were cast in Pulaski County. The total was .09% of the overall vote.

( | suggest removal )

JIMBOB47 says... November 21, 2017 at 6:22 a.m.

Just putting the word 'truth' with the name 'Clinton' in the same sentence. Are you kidding me? Why do you think Arkansas named him Slick Willie'?

( | suggest removal )

RP57 says... November 21, 2017 at 6:42 a.m.

The only part of the column I would disagree with are the excuses for why she lost: Comey, Russian meddling, etc. By this point I think most would agree she lost because she was not a good candidate. Many who voted for Trump only did so becasue they did not want her as President, that alone is a testament to how bad a candidate she was. That's the lesson Democrats need to learn if they want to win in the future.

( | suggest removal )

RBear says... November 21, 2017 at 7:23 a.m.

RP57, while I agree with some of your positions I find it a little myopic looking at the election overall. Yes, many of Trump's voters were ABH voters which further cuts into his claim of winning by massive proportions. However, as I stated she "won" this election hands down. What prevented her from taking it all were the razor-thin margins in three key states. Those margins could have swung either way and outside influence most likely pushed them towards Trump.
...
Looking at an article in CNN about a recent Brookings Institute study of the work demographics of America, the next three years will become interesting. Trump won in areas that have been left behind by the digital transformation. Those are rural areas where pay is low and the opportunities don't exist in quantities necessary to sustain the community. The people can't afford to leave and are bound to their residence by that lack of opportunity.
...
This shift will continue and if these people don't see some relief soon, they will distance themselves from Republicans. They are what I call sound-bite voters. God, guns, and gays only plays for so long until you realize it's not helping your economic position. The new economy is the best news the Democratic Party could have. Those workers have mid to high paying jobs, vote in increasingly growing numbers, and typically vote Democrat. The handwriting is on the wall.

( | suggest removal )

BirdDogsRock says... November 21, 2017 at 7:24 a.m.

The only balanced budgets the federal government has had in decades were under Bill Clinton's presidency. I remember clearly a bunch of economists worrying and pontificating about the hazards of paying off the federal debt too quickly. That achievement, alone, puts Clinton in a modern-day class by himself, among Presidents. "Businessman" Trump cannot match that achievement.

( | suggest removal )

mozarky2 says... November 21, 2017 at 7:36 a.m.

The economy under the first two years of the Clinton presidency, by any measure, was flatlined. It didn't move upward until the historic 1994 election.
Clinton was along for the ride on the prosperity that the new Republican Congress brought.

( | suggest removal )

Jfish says... November 21, 2017 at 7:47 a.m.

Carville, the realist, is always entertaining and I am sure Bill was also. As usual, the third wheel, Hillary had to speak also. My thoughts, A sore loser's sour grapes, Sounds like she's the obsessing one. Please print these words on her headstone.

( | suggest removal )

WhododueDiligence says... November 21, 2017 at 7:51 a.m.

"Many who voted for Trump only did so because they did not want her as President, ..."
*
This explanation doesn't explain how Trump won the Republican nomination. In the Republican primaries, many voted for Trump because they wanted Trump to be their Republican nominee more than they wanted any of the other 16 Republican candidates to be their nominee.
That's a very, very curious choice. What we see is what they lifted up from the rabbit hole.

( | suggest removal )

RBear says... November 21, 2017 at 7:52 a.m.

ROTFLMAO @ moz. I call BS on your “along for the ride claim.” Anyone with ANY brains in Econ knows the spinup or spindown for an economy takes a year or two. If anything, Republicans rose the prosperity of the Clinton WH. You are such a dumba** on issues. First ignorance on Dixiecrats and now this. Stick to shoveling coal.

( | suggest removal )

Click here to make a comment

To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.

ADVERTISEMENT

SHOPPING

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

Top Picks - Mobile App
Arkansas Online