Ending Bill Clinton’s Presidency prematurely will give Democrats the edge in the 2000 Presidential election. The way the Republicans are going after President Clinton, you would think they will take over the Presidency if he resigns or is removed. Of course, it is Al Gore who would take office. He would have over a year to present himself as the leader who can continue the popular Bill Clinton policies, but without the personal-life baggage. He would inherit all the advantages of being an incumbent President. He would miss out on all the in-fighting for the Democratic Presidential nomination that he will face if Bill Clinton serves his entire term. And if he proves himself in that year, he should be able to stave off the fund-raising questions, positioned as a successful incumbent President, instead of as a mere candidate.
Clinton’s current problems will not weaken the Democratic Party over the long term. Bill Clinton will be hurt, but Democrats will suffer only short-term harm. The Watergate scandal offers an on-point precedent. A Republican President resigned in disgrace. Numerous high-ranking Republican officials, including the Vice President, ended up convicted of serious crimes. Despite all this, and President Gerald Ford’s unpopular pardon of Richard Nixon, Ford almost won reelection in 1976 over Jimmy Carter. And after Carter, the Republicans took the White House for twelve years.
So the Republican Party was not weakened for any significant period of time by the transgressions of Richard Nixon, because they were perceived as Nixon’s failings, not as Republican failings. This attitude will be even more pronounced with the Clinton situation, because Clinton’s current problems stem from his personal and not his political failings. In fact, the only mistake Democrats could make would be to attach themselves too closely to Clinton, the individual. They should not make saving Clinton a vital Democratic issue. They should take a dignified, statesmanlike approach, like many Republicans did in 1973 and 1974. Democrats actually have another advantage. If the public feels Clinton has been treated unfairly, the Republicans will be blamed.
Bill Clinton’s problems will weaken Democratic prospects for the 1998 midterm Congressional elections. This is a distinct possibility, though not an absolute certainty. But we must ask, so what? The Republicans already control Congress. The midterm elections may give them a few extra votes, but won’t give them a veto-proof Congress. So their situation is materially unchanged. This is but a small, transient benefit, hardly worth the trouble.
So at any level of analysis, the Republicans have more to lose than to gain from a Clinton removal or resignation. Could all this be a conspiracy? Bill Clinton manufactures an incident causing his removal to give his friend Al Gore an early jump on the 2000 Presidential election? No, of course not. But Republicans should be careful what they wish for. They might just get their wish, and find they don’t like all the long-term ramifications.
We invite your comments.
If you wish to duplicate any of this material, please review our terms and conditions for the use of materials from this site.