When he was president the job opportunities were high cost of living was low gas was low everfything was fine...if he culd be elected again wuld he have yur vote? if no .. whuts the reasoN?
2006-08-03 13:41:26 · 27 answers · asked by nazanin 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
YES, Bill Clinton or even Hillary should and probably could be President of the US. They are two of the smartest people in politics and I certainly believe honest folks. They care about people. These morons who still think Bush is a good president are truly stupid people. The sad part about it, they are so stupid they don't even realize it. I feel sorry for them...
2006-08-03 13:49:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
No, all he did was ride the great economy Reagan produced out of the wreckage left behind from Carter. Clinton had the luxury of not being attacked, no war, and Reaganomics to make him look good. Anybody could have had a good run in those conditions. Bush wasn't so lucky. Before 9/11, he had already begun to fix the economic down slide that Clinton had started, and after 9/11 was forced to put all of his domestic programs on the back burner in order to secure our nation. Bush did not ask for what he has been dealt, but under the circumstances, he is doing a better job than Clinton could ever do.
2006-08-03 21:15:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He can't be president again! There are more jobs out there now then there have been since WWII, which is way past Clinton. It goes all the way back to FDR the president who went against tradition and stayed four years and caused the country to add a presidential time limit to the constitution that prevents Clinton from ever being president again. However, I'd rather vote for Bill than Gore (who, incidentally, Bill didn't like either), Kerry, or Hillary. I like him more now than I did when he was President. So do the Bushes, by the way.
2006-08-03 20:48:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bill Clinton had the good fortune to be president during the dot.com boom and before 9/11. After having seen Dubya for six years and considering the different circumstances, I'm not sure that there would be much difference between the two on domestic policy. The major difference is that I think Clinton would have gone into Afghanistan but not Iraq.
2006-08-03 22:17:09 · answer #4 · answered by F. Frederick Skitty 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh heck no.
He deployed the troops 300% more than the previous two administrations did and cut their numbers drastically anyway. He preached about how much we were needed to stop the ethnic cleansing in the resource rich, European Croatia, but not a peep when the UN and everyone else pulled out of the resource poor, African Rwanda.
The Job Opporunities was a left over from the previous administrations, and steadily declined after him. His stupid Vice President is married to Tipper Gore, otherwise known as Mrs. Censorship, who held Senate Hearings (as a civilian) to get Rock and Roll severely regulated.
The cost of gas doubled or more in price during Clinton's second term, from around $1.14ish to as much as $2.95. It hasn't done that in Bush's two terms. (Not that Bush isn't a loser on a Clinton-esque scale).
The man lied in court. He perjured himself. He should have been impeached for it.
If that doesn't do it for you, then look at NAFTA, which he was instrumental in bringing about and what's it's done to the economy.
Besides, I'm pretty sure Congress will be a Democrat majority. I'd like to see one branch ruled by one party and the other branch ruled by the other party. It keeps things very balanced, as opposed to all the crap Clinton and Bush both got away with during their party's reign in both branches.
While we're at it, bring back Maggie Thatcher!
2006-08-03 21:12:46 · answer #5 · answered by Muffie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Job opportunities are actually higher now than they ever were under Clinton. Still, I like Clinton. He would in fact raise our status with the rest of the world. He a slick scheister that gets blamed for nothing (Kyoto, Osama, Rwanda). I respect that. It's what made him a good president.
2006-08-03 20:56:13 · answer #6 · answered by MEL T 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely
2006-08-03 20:50:58 · answer #7 · answered by mcgo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the only reason that things were good when billy was president was because the presidents before him made it that way, in economics changes take years to come to fruit.
2006-08-03 20:46:55 · answer #8 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have always liked Bill Clinton ,yes I would vote for him again
2006-08-03 20:45:45 · answer #9 · answered by Yakuza 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wouldn't it be great...to go back to those days when Clinton was in office...Gas prices were lower... more job opportunities...*sigh* you actually could disagree with the president and not get harassed or labeled "anti-patriotic." ..... people were people.....yeah... good times...good times...
2006-08-03 20:49:50 · answer #10 · answered by SweetCoco 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋