http://www.dcourage.com/Clinton%20approval%20rating%20chart.JPG

http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/zFacts-Bush-approval-rating.gif

Crashman

First, no one said Bush was popular, so I don't know why you added that chart.  Everyone knows he isn't popular and no one has even attempted to say that he was.  Ironically he is still better liked than Congress, but hey if you add the two of them together we could create one person that just over half of America could like

Again I will restate the point that all Albionus was trying to say is the Bill Clinton wasn't super popular.  That is all, all this stuff about, "well Bush is less popular" is irrelevant to what the original arguement was.  I know it was a lot of posts ago, but it had nothing to do with Bush being more popular or well liked. 

 Would like like to argue that Bill Clinton's popularity will help Hillary greatly?  If so, then you can respond, if not, then you have missed the entire purpose of what Albionus has said.  That is where all of this started.  Simply put, is Bill Clinton popular enought to help Hillary win.  Albiounus said no, because he isn't that popular as witnessed by him failing to secure a majority of the votes in both elections.  What is your counter arguement?  That Bush is less liked???  That doesn't make any sense in terms of the discussion at hand.

The fact is Hillary wouldnt be in the position she is in to run for president if it wasnt for her husband. whether thats a plus or minus in the long run is to be seen.

Quite true.  It has actually amazed me how little we have seen of the former president in this campaign.  I think if he were more prevalent it would help people's perceptions of Hillary, but in th elong run probably hurt her campaign as the mentality that "She can't do it with out Bill" would be very prevalent.

However, I very much hope Hillary is not the Democrat's nomination.

With respect to the graphs, the Clinton one to illustrate his popularity.  The Bush one I put up just because I found it interesting, and an interesting commentary on our society, not as a comparison (In retrospect I should have probably stated that)

I think the reason the impeachment was so unpopular (and incidentally Clinton found innocent) is that the general population was of the opinion that he should have never BEEN in the position where he should be testifying under oath.  It was a rediculous position for him to be thrust in.

Granted, he did not handle the situation gracefully, but whatever.  That issue is long past.  I am more concerned with the questionable legality of the current president's actions along with the overstepping and abuse of power being done.

All in all I have been sick of both parties for quite some time.  South Park certainly hit the nail on the head.

South Park? I don't recall what episode you refer to.

If that was the case there wouldn't be one president that would of served out his full term. They all break the law in one way or another.

You think if Clinton was a republican he would of been impeached? 

Out of all the things you've said here that I disagree with, the most egregiously incorrect was the comment on universal healthcare.

In poll after poll after poll, it is incredibly and crystal clear that the majority of Americans want universal health coverage. It's not even close or debatable. This information took me less than two minutes to dig up: 

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/living/US/healthcare031020_poll.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/01/opinion/polls/main2528357.shtml
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/poll-shows-many-republicans-favor-universal-healthcare-gays-in-military-2007-06-28.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2003-10-19-health-poll_x.htm
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9e06e7d71631f931a35750c0a9619c8b63
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2005/09/universal_healthcare.html

If you'd like, I can keep going -- but the polls aren't even remotely ambiguous. In most cases, people prefer universal health care by a 2:1 margin.

Again, there are other errors here, but this one is particularly egregious, and needs to be corrected. 

Actually graer no you wouldn't especially for the specific questions that Clinton was charged with. the average number of perjury charges every year is around 62 people. the number of court cases including civil cases is many many many times that. Many people lie under oath even all the time with absolutely no charge. Even when it is obvious it is very very difficult to uphold a charge of perjury in court. Technically lying under oath cof any kind an be considered perjury in its simpliest form it is way to rampant to even consider going after on a regular basis unless it is material to the case. I do not know of one lawyer who thinks that Clinton's charges will hold up. well scratch that I have met one lawyer before who works at Kirkland and Ellis who does think it will stand up and despite what many people think Ken Starr actually believed in his case...but that is a different story.

The election between the giant douche and the turd sandwich?

favorite quote:

"But Stan, don't you know, it's always between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. Nearly every election since the beginning of time has been between some douche and some turd. They're the only people who suck up enough to make it that far in politics. "