See our most recent Debate Digest article: Bosnia and Herzegovina membership in the EU
Argument: If Clinton's election would be dynastic, what about Bush II?
From Debatepedia
[
]
]Parent debate
[]
]Supporting quotes
- "Critics Cry 'Dynasty!' Over Clintons, But Not Bushes". Huffington Post. January 23, 2008 - "On the campaign trail, one criticism frequently lobbed at Hillary Clinton is that her presidency would be the extension of dynastic politics. The political sequence of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton has left many critics, mostly conservatives, rolling their eyes and salivating with ire.
- On NBC's Meet the Press, Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan said that such a run of political lineage is a 'sickness' that 'is giving so many people pause.'
- But is the critique fair? And, if so, where were these voices when George W. Bush ran for office in 2000?
- Among Clinton supporters, the answer to those two questions are universally: 'no' and 'nonexistent.' Clinton, they argue, is the victim of poor political timing - trying to follow one family's occupation of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave with her own. And George W. Bush was never regarded with the same dynastic skepticism."