When did politics become a blood sport?

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
I'm pinpointing it to when Bill Clinton was President. Prior to that there was partisan bickering, but we saw a dramatic increase Democrats demonizing the GOP during the Clinton years, and it's gotten worse ever since. I don't recall this absolute hatred and violent language during Reagan or GHWB's administration. The Dems were ####ty, to be sure, but there was still some collegiality.

Now they're flat out insane and inciting violence.

I remember during the Clinton impeachment hearings, that was the first time I ever wanted to punch politicians in the face. When I would get so angry watching these scumbags rip apart a 20-something year old girl, and call other women horrible names and shred their reputations, that I would literally yell at the TV. Watching all those fake "feminists" defend a sexual predator was just infuriating, and the media attacking the victims was almost unbearable.

During Barack Obama's presidency he did nothing more than line his pockets and the pockets of his cronies, and talk about how evil the Republicans were. He has no accomplishments to speak of.

Fast forward to President Trump and now the Dems are having a full on psychotic break.

But it started with Clinton.
 

stgislander

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
It's funny, during Reagan both sides would say the nastiest things about each other, but then Reagan and Tip O'Neill would get together and work out deals. I would say the polarization really started during Bush 41.
 

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
I'm pinpointing it to when Bill Clinton was President. Prior to that there was partisan bickering, but we saw a dramatic increase Democrats demonizing the GOP during the Clinton years, and it's gotten worse ever since. I don't recall this absolute hatred and violent language during Reagan or GHWB's administration. The Dems were ####ty, to be sure, but there was still some collegiality.

Now they're flat out insane and inciting violence.

I remember during the Clinton impeachment hearings, that was the first time I ever wanted to punch politicians in the face. When I would get so angry watching these scumbags rip apart a 20-something year old girl, and call other women horrible names and shred their reputations, that I would literally yell at the TV. Watching all those fake "feminists" defend a sexual predator was just infuriating, and the media attacking the victims was almost unbearable.

During Barack Obama's presidency he did nothing more than line his pockets and the pockets of his cronies, and talk about how evil the Republicans were. He has no accomplishments to speak of.

Fast forward to President Trump and now the Dems are having a full on psychotic break.

But it started with Clinton.

You are in the right time period but it wasn't Clinton or the impeachment exactly that did it.

For 60 years the Democrats had a lock on the house and in 1994 Gingrich and the GOP broke it.... Not only taking the House, but the Senate at the same time! And by over 50 seats in the house.

They have been pissed off ever since.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
You are in the right time period but it wasn't Clinton or the impeachment exactly that did it.



I disagree with the whole Bork thing .... Clinton's / Democrats raised the stakes after seeing thy could get away with 'The Politics Of Personal Destruction' they so aptly accused the Right of
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
But it started with Clinton.

I think your time frame is right, but I think it correlates more with George Soros and his founding of his "Open Society" (est in the US in 1993). The Foundation supports only leftist causes like Russia, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street...

The conspiracy side of me says that Soros has his hands in, if not actually instigating, every leftist cause aimed at destroying our constitutional republic.
 

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
you guys are going to want to read some american history. The Jackson campaign was pretty nasty.

But politics has always been that way, right back to the romans. It certainly is not something the democrats created in the 90s. In fact they were complaining about it during the clinton admin. The vast right wing conspiracy was their term for fake news. just like trump they claimed that every story that came out was just lies ginned up to derail the president. :shrug:
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
you guys are going to want to read some american history. The Jackson campaign was pretty nasty.

Political "discourse" near the end of, and for some time after, WWI was particularly nasty and vicious. Ole Woodrow really fostered a deep divide...not that different than the one we have going on today. Wilson was, in many respects, the "Barry Obama" of his time.
 

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
And then it all turned out to be true.

now that is funny.

I certainly beleive that the clintons are as dirty as any other politicians. However, the long list of people the are accused of killing is comical. There was plenty of real scandal associated with the clintons, just like there is about trump. THat is what makes people beleive the BS.
In any case, the bad blood in politics has always been there
 

BOP

Well-Known Member
You are in the right time period but it wasn't Clinton or the impeachment exactly that did it.

For 60 years the Democrats had a lock on the house and in 1994 Gingrich and the GOP broke it.... Not only taking the House, but the Senate at the same time! And by over 50 seats in the house.

They have been pissed off ever since.

And the Give-a-craps have been befuddled ever since.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
you guys are going to want to read some american history. The Jackson campaign was pretty nasty.

But politics has always been that way, right back to the romans. It certainly is not something the democrats created in the 90s. In fact they were complaining about it during the clinton admin. The vast right wing conspiracy was their term for fake news. just like trump they claimed that every story that came out was just lies ginned up to derail the president. :shrug:

As I recall, Jefferson claimed his opponent was a girly-man.

The difference between "vast right wing conspiracy" and "fake news" is that there was no right-wing conspiracy to show anything other than reality, whereas "fake news" is designed to ignore reality and show falsehoods.




Remember, Mrs. Bill Clinton is saying that by making the truth of her controlling the DNC, cheating to win against Sanders, and conspiring with the media to control the narrative to only what she wanted, that was somehow "cheating" by the Russians. Wikipedia says it wasn't the Russians that gave them the data, but that's still what the story is from the Clinton camp. But, the story to me is that she is literally saying, "you guys cheated by telling the truth about me."
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Remember Aaron Burr, and jackson. Duels were fought and President's wives were called whores.

Politics has always been a dirty business and a rich mans game.
I suppose Truman was the poorest man to become President, and IMO one of the best.
If he saw what the Democrat party has turned into today he would sh1t.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
The difference between "vast right wing conspiracy" and "fake news" is that there was no right-wing conspiracy to show anything other than reality, whereas "fake news" is designed to ignore reality and show falsehoods.



Except there was NO Fake News or VRWC - it was Rush and Fox News telling the truth about what Clinton and Company were up from Whitewater to the shady behind closed doors healthcare debacle
 
Top