Sirotablog
David Sirota is a political journalist and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist at Creators Syndicate. David writes about political corruption, globalization and working-class economic issues often ignored by both of America's political parties.
-
October 23, 2007 1:57 PM
Pretending Ross Perot Never Happened
Working in Democratic political circles out west, one of the most irritating and annoying memes that tends to pop up is the myth of Bill Clinton's supposed resounding victories out here in 1992. This is most recently being regurgitated by Mark Penn, Hillary Clinton's top campaign aide (and, incidentally, the head of a PR firm that helps corporations crush unions).
Here's what I'm talking about:
"And because of her unique ability to take advantage of changing demographics, Hillary can also turn Colorado, Arizona, Nevada and Montana from Red to Blue. Bill Clinton was the only Democrat since 1968 to win these states, and Hillary Clinton is the only Democrat positioned to win them in 2008."
If you can get past the laughable claim that "Hillary Clinton is the only Democrat position to win [the West] in 2008," take a look at these two election maps side-by-side, one from 1992 and one from 1996 from Dave Leip's Election Atlas:
In this map, red is Democrat and blue is Republican. You will note that the Western states Clinton lost the Western states that Penn referred to in 1996, after winning them in 1992. That's because of Ross Perot - the guy every Clinton triumphalist wishes we would all forget so that we just think that Bill Clinton was the most awesome candidate with the most incredible cross-regional appeal in the history of politics.
In fact, the data suggests something far more mundane. In 1992, Perot received 23% in Colorado, 24% in Arizona, 26% in Nevada and 26% in Montana. That's how Clinton became "the only Democrat since 1968 to win these states" - not because he was some kind of amazingly newfangled candidate with Western appeal, but because a third-party candidate took a huge chunk out of the Republicans. And if Democrats don't appreciate that fundamental truth and why a populist candidacy like Ross Perot was so potent in this region, then they telegraph that they don't really appreciate how this region's unique politics really works.
This isn't to say a Democrat - or even Hillary Clinton - cannot compete in some Western states in 2008. But her strategists should stop propagating such absurdly overstated spin and revisionist history. It just makes them look like a bunch of two-bit hacks.
-
TAKE ACTION
-
About David Sirota
David Sirota is a political journalist and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist at Creators Syndicate. He is the New York Times bestselling author of Hostile Takeover. He lives in Denver, Colorado. His daily blog can be found at CREDO Action. He contributes regularly to the Denver Post's Web site, is a senior editor at In These Times magazine and is working on his second book. He has been profiled in Newsweek and the Rocky Mountain News and is widely known for his reporting on political corruption, globalization and working-class economic issues often ignored by both of America's political parties. Sirota serves as co-chair of the Progressive States Network, a 501(c)3 organization that supports state legislators and that is a partner of CREDO.
You can subscribe to Sirota's e-mail newsletter by going to davidsirota.com and signing up in the lefthand corner. To find out more about Sirota, download his official biography or see his recent media appearances. You can e-mail him at sirota@credoaction.com.
The views expressed on this blog are his own, and do not necessarily represent the views of Working Assets (publisher of CREDO Action) or the institutions Sirota works for.
-
Recent Sirotablog entries
- Fox News: "Historians Pretty Much Agree" That FDR Prolonged the Great Depression
- Maddow Busts Morgan Stanley Board Member for Conflict of Interest
- Viva Las Vegas?
- Gov. Paterson Is Either Deliberately Deceptive Or Grossly Uninformed
- We WERE Punked
- CO-SEN: Potential Huge Differences Between Candidates Have National Implications
- Kirk as USTR - Changeiness or Change?
- Maddow: Did America Get Punked On the Bailout? Yes...Now Here's What to Do.
- Becerra Turns Down USTR
- In a Recession, Should States Raise Taxes Or Slash Spending?
-
More David Sirota
-
This Modern World
-
February 17, 2009 -
February 10, 2009 -
February 4, 2009 -
January 27, 2009 -
January 20, 2009
-
-
Donations Recipients
-
RSS feeds
Discussion
Starting with the red-blue toggling, this is not a compelling incite.
No one really cares about Mark Penn's historical spin.
Notwithstanding the uninterrupted stripe of blue (here) down the mountain states in '96, Clinton totally shed his minority patina in his easy re-election.
Better question here for Dave - albeit an old one, is why the mountain states are historically so anti-populist.
Lord knows, the mountain states are over represented and disproportionately "porked" for over a century now.
Roman Hruska (harumph) loudly trumpeted the statesmanship so typical from the mountain/plain states: mediocrity.
As far as the odious Mark Penn is concerned one really must see the outstanding documentaries by Adam Curtis called "Century of the Self" and "The Trap". In COTS Mark Penn and his dubious "Focus Group" polling methodology really gets skewered.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/century_of_the_self_episode_4.shtml
In "The Trap" Curtis really lays bare the corruption at the heart of of Tony Blair's New Labor and the Clintonistas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trap_(television_documentary_series)
Par for the course for Blackwater Penn.
Hillary is indeed no populist, she's more like Kerry a east coast elitist with heavy corporate ties. As a result she'll never get the white male working class vote or independents for that matter.
Penn also neglects to mention the tremendous amount of hatred that the Clintons engendered by supporting NAFTA, WTO and PNTR with China. Many people rightfull percived the Democrats as abandoning the working and middle-class to the corporate wolves. It was so bad it cost the Democrats their majority in the House and Senate.
There won't be any 2nd chances for Democrats in '08 at the rate their going. They are doing a fine job alienating independents, pro-labor Democrats and even liberal liberal Democrats with their policies.
And this spells doom for Hillary who will need every vote out there to pull off a victory. Right off the bat she loses independents, labor and the anti-war left. And it just gets worse after that.
Oh Yes, Hillary is just bound to do great in the Western States. Keep pandering to the radical Open Borders Hispanic lobbies and suggesting Lou Dobb's fans are all racists.
What will be the blow back from the last 20 years of shameless and increasing Latino pandering? Well now that you failed to deliver on your virtually treasonous Comprehensive Immigration Reform agenda watch all the radical Open Borders groups along with the ANSWER loons show up in Denver. Nothing wins over middle America like have likes of MEChA and the ATZLAN crazies taking to the streets demanding that Hillary pledge to back mass Illegal Alien amnesty and the continuation of our immigration fiasco. Now that is just bound to help the Democrats carry the Western and Borders states.
What exactly is Mark Penn smoking these days that allows him with a straight face to tell Hillary and his anti union cheap labor loving Corporate clients what they want to hear.
I have not seen such self delusion since the Dukakis camp tried to convince themselves that crime would not be a number top issue in the mist of a runaway urban crack epidemic.
Bill Clinton ran a phony "populist" candidate and then sold out once in office. But here's another shocker. Bill Clinton never capitalized on the economy until Ross Perot put it first and foremost. If it were not for Perot, the GOP would have pulled another "Willie Horton" on Bill Clinton but this time likely with the Gennifer Flowers sex scandal and Bush Sr would have won reelection. From the election page David Sirota pointed to, Bill Clinton was only able to muster 43% of the popular vote despite the fact that Bush Sr's economic and even foreign policy ratings were DISMAL. Even in 1996 when Clinton was supposedly getting an "easy" chance at reelection, he could only muster 49% of the popular vote. Not since Jimmy Carter has a single Democrat broken 50% and I might add that Hillary will be lucky to break 45% if she wins the primary and what with the even LOWER approval ratings the Democrats in Congress are getting for going with Bush. And don't anyone give me SHIT talk that it was Ross Perot's fault in both '92 and '96 elections. Ever since the Democrats DISGRACED themselves but giving in to RAYGUN have they lost their appeal ! It's time to start supporting 3rd party because you can't trust the Democrats to show an ounce of opposition against the GOP and any Democrat who does will be REBUKED by their leaders just like Pete Stark was rebuked by PEE-LOW-SICK ! Pete Stark is remarkably cool and if I were him, I'd leave the Democratic Party and run as an Independent since he'll be safe by now to free himself of being tied to a party. By the way, what is Pete Stark's approval in his district?
"Unbroken stripe of blue down the mountain states in '96"?
Arizona and New Mexico are not blue on the '96 map.
The unbroken stripe of blue goes down the plains states from the Dakotas to Texas on both maps. This area is the Wheat Belt, and is on the dividing line of the rainfall pattern where the rain shadow of the Rockies meets the rainfall of the Midwest.
Those states don't even have any mountains.
What they have is a lot of farmers, who are loosing ground as the big agri-businesses run them out in favor of corporate farms.
Couple that with the drought in the Dakotas which, if not broken soon, is setting those two states up to be the next Dust Bowl.
No wonder those states have no faith in the Limousine Liberals of the Democratic party, who, if ignorance is bliss, are the happiest people on the planet.
Join the Discussion