this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2025
71 points (98.6% liked)
Asklemmy
51504 readers
558 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Clinton mostly became president by embracing Reaganism, so he didn't really pave the path and it did continue
Yeah but my point is, we'd still have democrats in office to ensure no Republican is voted in to destroy the country from within. Gore would've won over Bush, we'd still have Obama, we might've even had Bernie Sanders or so. All politicians who're democratic who might not just keep Reaganism alive, they have their own ways too.
If Reagan was never elected, Clinton never would be either. I also see no reason why you think you'd have Obama still after Gore. You make it sound like the Lewinsky scandal is the only reason that Democrats didn't get 32 straight years in office.