#1992 election

[politicalrpf]

Bill Clinton being introduced by a University of New Mexico student, 1992.

[deadpresidents]

Do you think James Baker could have been president?

Baker was certainly well-qualified for the job, but I don't know if he would have been as effective in the Jed Bartlet position as he was in the Leo McGarry role. If he had ever made a run for the Presidency, his best bet when it came to timing was probably the 1996 election. I don't think he would have beaten Bill Clinton, and we never really saw Baker on the campaign trail as a candidate, so I'm not sure how he would have done in the primaries against Bob Dole. But that would have been the year for him to take a shot at it.

After his best friend, George H.W. Bush, was defeated for re-election in 1992 (a campaign that Baker managed), Baker probably would have been a really good choice as someone's Vice President. As a former Treasury Secretary, Secretary of State, and White House Chief of Staff under two Presidents, Baker was the ultimate political insider and had significant foreign policy experience. He would have fit perfectly in the slot that Dick Cheney ultimately filled as George W. Bush's running mate in 2000. However, since Baker was also from Texas, a Bush-Baker ticket would have created Electoral College problems. The Electoral College is ridiculously complicated and has some rules that most people don't even realize. The Constitution would have prohibited Electors from Texas from casting both of their Electoral votes for Bush and Baker since they were both Texas residents. So that could have resulted in one of them not receiving enough Electoral votes to win the election. That's why Cheney (who was living in Texas in the years before the 2000 campaign) had to switch his official residence back to Wyoming before the election. Baker was probably too closely connected (personally and professionally) with George H.W. Bush for George W. Bush to want to choose him as VP if he could have, but he would have been a very good pick for that role.

[jonathanbrandisarchive]

Q&A: Jon Votes for Getting Involved

We've written stories about Jon's acting technique; his interest in directing; the movies and TV shows he's worked on; his favorite food; his friends, family, fashion sense, fears, hopes and dreams; the types of girls he likes and the types he doesn't. We've written about Jon's travels and troubles. We've discussed his pets and his house and how he spends holidays and how he got his driver's license and his favorite subjects in school and his prom and graduation. We've told you the silly things and the serious things Jon has done. We've printed what he thinks is cool and what isn't, and we've even written about how Jon likes to write. But we haven't said much about Jon and politics.

Big Bopper, 1995

BB: Do you think it's important for kids who aren't 18 yet to be involved in government?

Jonathan: Yeah, I think so, because I think the government listens to everybody's points of view about things, if the ideas are smart.

BB: Regardless of age?

Jonathan: I think everybody has something to say if they've been following any kind of election seriously.

BB: What if teenagers don't care about what's going on in our country?

Jonathan: I think they should definitely think about it. You don't want to reach age 18 totally oblivious to what's going on, you know, to the politics of the world. You have to pay attention, because you have to be prepared and you're going to have to know what's going on.

BB: How can teenagers become more aware? How can they form opinions on issues like gun control, abortion rights and things like that?

Jonathan: I think not by rebelling against their parents' views, but by taking their own stand on issues. A lot of kids listen to what their parents are voting for and then follow that. If they kind of listened to both sides of the story and then took their own point of view, then—you know what I'm saying.

BB: How can they find out other people's points of view?

JON: Just follow it on TV, because that's the way you're going to learn.

Looking ahead to the next election

In 1992, then-16-year-old J.B. was pretty interested in the presidential election that year.

As you may recall, the election pitted Bill Clinton (who won, obviously) against George Bush, who was in the White House at the time, and the candidates were pretty much neck-and-neck. Though Jon admitted that he and his friends "don't go out on Saturday nights and talk about politics," he was definitely more involved than he had been during the election four years before, when Jon was 12 and "cared more about skateboards and stuff." 

Jon couldn't vote in this past election, but if he could have, he was pretty adamant that he would have chosen Clinton over Bush: "Because, well, because he's not an idiot!" He also liked Al Gore, Clinton's choice for Vice President, because Gore takes a strong stand on environmental issues.

When the election rolls around next year, you can expect Jonathan—who is 19 and can vote now—to be more interested than ever in who winds up in the White House.

"I'll be looking forward to it," he said.

[billclinton42]

An analysis of Bill Clinton and the Cultural Wars that shaped him and influenced the 1992 election.

*this is a topic I find really interesting and it is a quick informative amateur post which is just my interpretation. Of course, I am condensing it and not putting everything in here* 

Bill Clinton was born in 1946, after the Second World War and during the time in which the Second Red Scare had begun in the United States. Given that during the Red Scare, tensions with the Soviet Union were at large and the United States Government tried to seek out Soviet spies, there became a definition of what it meant to be “a true American.” This can be seen in that this was also the age of McCarthyism, where Senator Joe McCarthy tried and accused many American citizens without regard to evidence. Senator McCarthy spent almost five years trying in vain to expose communists and other left-wing “loyalty risks” in the U.S. government.  Many thousands of Americans faced congressional committee hearings, FBI investigations, loyalty tests, and sedition laws; negative judgements in those arenas brought consequences ranging from imprisonment to deportation, loss of passport, or, most commonly, long-term unemployment. It is no secret that immigrants were targeted, civil rights activists, and people of color in general (as well as the LGBTQ community) This is due to the fact that they were an easily defined “other” and previous paranoia of the Japanese Empire and the attack on Pearl Harbor had already stigmatized anyone who didn’t appear to be a White American. 

This was the root of the Culture War that would define Bill Clinton and come to full form in the 60s because though McCarthyism died out around 1957, it contributed to the uniformity of the 50s and the culture. This is due to the fact that many people tried to prove themselves American enough and they did this by conforming in a way in which they deemed standard for all Americans to behave. During the 1950s, a sense of uniformity pervaded American society. Conformity was common, as young and old alike followed group norms rather than striking out on their own. Though men and women had been forced into new employment patterns during World War II, once the war was over, traditional roles were reaffirmed. Men expected to be the breadwinners; women, even when they worked, assumed their proper place was at home. Sociologist David Riesman observed the importance of peer-group expectations in his influential book, The Lonely Crowd. He called this new society "other-directed," and maintained that such societies lead to stability as well as conformity. Television contributed to the homogenizing trend by providing young and old with a shared experience reflecting accepted social patterns.

What McCarthyism and the 1950s deemed as a “true American” consisted of these traits:

Being White

Following traditional gender roles

A pride in the military and serving in war (this is due to the pride and support of WWII).

This became the common theme of the 1950s and became known as the “conservative culture”. Though rebellion against these norms came into play in many ways, music is one example: ll. Tennessee singer Elvis Presley (it should be noted that Bill identified with Elvis and enjoyed his music). popularized black music in the form of rock and roll, and shocked more staid Americans with his ducktail haircut and undulating hips. In addition, Elvis and other rock and roll singers demonstrated that there was a white audience for black music, thus testifying to the increasing integration of American culture, this served as a foreshadowing to the culture wars that would come to light in the 60s. 

The Baby Boomer Generation became the “counterculture” in many ways going against the norms set by the “conservative culture.” This can be seen that in the 60s movements by marginalized groups suppressed during the McCarthy and 50s era, gained more support amongst young people. 

How Bill Clinton was shaped by The CounterCulture: Like many, Bill Clinton was influenced by the Counter Culture and became a part of it. This can be seen in his admiration of Martin Luther King support for Civil Rights, and his opposition to the Vietnam War. 

How this influenced the 1992 election: 

George H.W. Bush belonged to the generation that lived through WWII and supported the conservative culture that was the norm in the 1950s.

Bill Clinton belonged to the baby boomer generation and the Counterculture that took place in the 1960s that rebelled against the culture of the 1950s. 

The 1992 election was very much representative of the “conservative culture” vs. the “counterculture” war that had happened between the two cultures in the 60s. 

This can be seen in how the candidates spoke of one another and the issues that were brought up in the election.

The main issues that were discussed were character, moral values, and service in the military. 

1. The issue of character shows how the 1992 election was representative of a cultural war. George H.W. Bush’s strategy was to portray Bill Clinton as a promiscuous, pot-inhaling, stereotypical hippie. Though Bill Clinton was rather promiscuous in his youth, the fact that Bush chose to highlight on it was evident of a cultural war being present in the election because it fed into the 1950s norm that sex should be reserved only for marriage, in contrast to the counterculture 60s trait of sexual liberation. The issue of pot was also evident of a culture war in the election because again this fed into the 1950s conservative culture norm that recreational drug use was bad under any circumstance, vs the 1960s counter culture trait of experimentation with drug use. Remember Bill Clinton’s iconic quote: “When I was in England, I experimented with Marijuana a time or two and I didn’t like it, and I didn’t inhale and never tried it again.” This fed into the hippie stereotype and though while it is hard for some to imagine now, many of those who belonged to the older generation “looked at Bill Clinton and saw every hippie they ever wanted to sock in the jaw.” In the same way, Bill Clinton portrayed Bush as stagnant and unchanging, a product of the 1960s counter culture where the youth felt that the government didn’t do enough or progress enough change. 

2. The issue of moral values also demonstrates how the 1992 election was influenced by the conservative culture vs. counter culture war. This can be seen in the attacks on Hillary Clinton and family values. The Bush campaign often attacked Hillary’s previous work as a lawyer. This demonstrates how the election was influenced by the culture wars because the Bush campaign was sticking to the traditional gender roles of the 1950s society where “women, even when they worked, assumed their proper place was at home.” Hillary being very independent and outside of the home represented the 1960s counter culture trait in which women began to liberate themselves more and were free to both work and be involved in domestic life and not have to choose between one or the other. The Bush campaign also criticized Hillary’s active role Bill’s campaigning. 

3. Service in the military. Perhaps the most distinct and demonstrative issue on how the conservative and counter culture came into play in the 1992 election, this was significant because Bill was the first president in several years who had not been alive to witness WWII. So naturally when it came to light that Bill had been opposed to the Vietnam War, the Bush campaign jumped on this. This is due to the fact that Bush, having served in WWII, could not understand Bill’s opposition to the Vietnam war. Bush himself even said in the 2nd debate “I don’t know if that’s a generational thing or what,” when describing anti-war protests American students would go to abroad. This demonstrates the cultural wars influence because it was very WWII generation vs. the counter culture generation of baby boomers because they were seeing the wars from a different perspective. The WWII conservative culture saw military service as something to take pride in and that all wars were just. While the 1960s counter culture questioned the government’s involvement in Vietnam. 

In conclusion, despite this cultural war Americans aged 60 and over showed a clear bias in favor of Bill Clinton, according to the polls. He also ran well among other demographic groups, including half of the military veterans, (despite the furor over his draft status during the Vietnam War), half of the first-time voters, and more than half of union members.

Of course there were other influences in the 1992 election and other factors that influenced Bill Clinton but the culture wars of the 50s-60s really did shape his political beliefs and eventually his run for the presidency. 

Bonus: This is my favorite magazine cover of Bill because it makes reference to the 1968 Beatles song ‘Revolution’ which came out while Bill was in college and the Beatles were a very counter culture band: 

[itshillaryrodamn]

1992 election night

[politicalrpf]

"George Bush's Dream Team" by Signe Wilkinson, 1992.

[politicalrpf]

The 1992 Vice Presidential debate, as illustrated by Charlie Daniel.

[politicalrpf]

October 12th, 1992 cover of TIME Magazine.