In this thread, as in many threads, I see little discussion of what actually should be done and can be improved; instead I see pure complaining, misdirects, and preemptive political siding. I think this is one of the symptoms of modern US government's problem: people too polarized to have constructive conversation. As they say, the two extremes have more in common than the productive middle.
Republicans maintained their majorities in the House and Senate in 1996? Despite Clinton (the better candidate) winning the presidency and Newt, Dole and Co being complete loons. Obama will win in 2012. But he'll have a harder time motivating the college kids to come out and vote if they lose faith/interest in the system.
The first was only about a week while the second one was about 3 weeks long. I doubt that if there is a shutdown this one will last too long. I think there will be a strong pressure to come to agreement once the parks and Smithsonian shut down.
As other posters have noted it ended up politically hurting the Republicans more than it did Clinton and if I recall the Republicans had to back off more of their positions than Clinton. The shutdown also doomed any chance of Newt Gingrich running for President in 1996.
If you count the holidays, the other one was pretty short as well. (As if anything federal gets done over the holidays, ha )
Keep in mind though at the start of the shutdowns Clinton's ratings where in the tank while Gingrich and the Republicans were good. Clinton got some of his highest approval ratings at the end of the shutdown while the Gingrich's plummeted. The Republicans held the Congress in 1996 but they lost some seats in the House while picking up seats in Southern states that had open Senate races. Also consider that if a government shutdown is seen widely to be the Republican's fault this might actually energize the Democratic base and young voters.
But Newt and Clinton are no longer involved. Newt was widely seen as a jerk and Clinton a good guy. There can be no comparisons made.
Clinton might've been seen as a good guy but not widely as an effective president. He was coming off of a health care fiasco, a crushing defeat in 1994, there was open talk about whether he was relevant anymore or that he might even change parties. Anyway if it comes down to Obama versus Boehner in public opinion I think Obama will win easily.
The Repubs always benefit in the long run from a government shutdown and the posturing leading up to it because it shows the government as being non functional, the GOP standard theme, which is necessary to convince little folk not to pay taxes, though it really benefits the fat cats who fund the GOP and Libertarian Parties.
Gingrich was always toxic. Clinton is an exceptional politician. Month by month ratings aren't meaningful. They won both houses, woke up their base, rebranded their party as the 'fiscally responsible' one -- at least to their supporters, and claimed newfound focus on balanced budgets and austerity. Leading, in part, to 2000 and 2004 presidential wins. Maybe Newt took one for the team. Obviously, there's a lot more going on -- but it was hardly a disaster for the Republicans. Obama will always trump Boehner in public opinion and should win in 2012. It's congress, local elections, fundraising, and 2016 they're gunning for. Plus impacting what Obama tries to get through over the next six yrs. If you're the party that screams 'the government should butt out' you'll always benefit more from dysfunction then the party that talks of government helping people.
Well I would have guessed the spread was much bigger. Possible I let my personal feeling at the time cloud my memory. I just Googled job approval of 33% for Newt and 54% for Clinton on 96 Apr 9-10. Slightly larger spread. wow i just checked and on the same day congress as a whole polled higher than Newt. That's not good.
Look at this fat cow. <object id="flashObj" width="486" height="412" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,47,0"><param name="movie" value="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="flashVars" value="videoId=895104502001&playerID=19407224001&playerKey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdQtJLv7zbMPiBGChHKnGYSG&domain=embed&dynamicStreaming=true" /><param name="base" value="http://admin.brightcove.com" /><param name="seamlesstabbing" value="false" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="swLiveConnect" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=895104502001&playerID=19407224001&playerKey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdQtJLv7zbMPiBGChHKnGYSG&domain=embed&dynamicStreaming=true" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" swLiveConnect="true" allowScriptAccess="always" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object>
While I don't disagree with her that we all have our financial obligations and responsibilities. Especially if you have a family to support. So I don't blame her for saying she can't give up her paycheck but yes I do agree she looks like a fat cow and can probably start saving some money by eating less.
