OPINION:
Liberals predicting Donald Trump’s impending political demise should recall one of their own: Bill Clinton. Mr. Clinton already plumbed President Trump’s worst-case scenarios and survived. Even congressional Republicans, for whom a “Clinton reprise” is a bigger threat, have less to fear than liberals would like to believe.
To hear liberals tell it, Mr. Trump’s troubles already allow them to plan their inaugural and congressional majorities. Theirs is not a question of if or when, but how big their windfall will be. However, liberals’ problem is history — their own — contradicts their enthusiasm. Bill Clinton’s presidency argues that the worst of troubles — and troubles closely paralleling Mr. Trump’s — can be far from fatal.
Liberals love to remind America Mr. Trump did not win a majority of 2016’s popular vote. True. However, Mr. Trump won a much higher percentage of the popular vote than Bill Clinton did — and without needing the opposition to split.
Bill Clinton’s 1992 victory was the political equivalent to drawing an inside straight in poker. A mild economic downturn and Ross Perot’s strong third-party challenge denied George H.W. Bush re-election.
Even with these — neither of which he had any hand in — Mr. Clinton only managed 43 percent of the popular vote. In comparison, Mr. Trump’s 46.1 percent of the popular vote was both substantially larger than Mr. Clinton’s, and the difference between Mr. Trump and Mr. Clinton was larger than the difference between Mr. Trump and Hillary Clinton last year.
Liberals will quickly say Mr. Trump immediately hurt his weak victory with scandals in office — despite having little to point to as proof of what those “scandals” are. The Clintons did not have to wait to accumulate scandals in office. They simply unpacked the multitude they brought with them. Then they built from there.
Liberals will point to the disastrous start to Mr. Trump’s legislative ledger. Mr. Trump and Republicans have been unable to reform or replace Obamacare as promised, and now tax reform is off to a late start.
Again, Bill Clinton beat Mr. Trump here. Mr. Clinton also went after health care and taxes — only in reverse. Despite having enormous Democratic majorities (Democrats won 258 House and 57 Senate seats in 1992, versus Republicans’ 241 and 52 in 2016), Mr. Clinton had even less success.
Yes, Mr. Clinton first got what he wanted — a tax increase so large he himself later disavowed it — but it took him until August 1993 to get it. And Mr. Clinton did not have to contend with the significant partisan opposition Mr. Trump and Republicans today do.
Mr. Clinton was even less successful on health care than Mr. Trump has been. Despite those huge Democratic majorities, Clintoncare, would consume another year before unraveling in the Senate in August 1994.
The point of this comparison: Mr. Clinton did not simply survive, but he thrived. Despite a weaker base, more scandals and less legislative success, Mr. Clinton won re-election — substantially increasing his popular vote percentage (by more than 6 percent).
Of course, this does not mean Mr. Trump need not worry, or that Congressional Republicans shouldn’t, either. Recall Mr. Clinton’s 1994 midterm brought a Republican landslide that cost him Congress for the remainder of his presidency. However, with the approach of the 2018 midterms, Mr. Trump and Republicans are less threatened.
First, Mr. Trump did not win because the opposition split. He won 30 states to Hillary Clinton’s 20 and, according to the liberal Daily Kos, 230 House districts to her 205.
Second, Republicans have won all four of the special election seats they had to defend thus far. Yes, victory margins were lower, but they included open seat races (into at least one in Georgia the left poured massive money) compared to the former incumbents’ margins.
In the Senate, Republicans are defending just eight seats to Democrats’ 25. Those 25 include seats in 10 states that Mr. Trump won — six by 5 percent or more.
Finally, Mr. Clinton’s experience offers something for Mr. Trump even in a worst-case scenario. Mr. Clinton lost Congress, but he actually fared better with an opposition Congress. It produced legislation that helped re-elect him (notably, welfare reform, which liberals still detest) and a balanced budget (and economic boom) that he would not have acceded to on his own. Congress also overplayed its hand on impeachment, which proved to be not only Bill’s salvation but Hillary’s, too.
Perhaps liberals in their euphoria have forgotten their own history. Or perhaps they know it all too well, and feel the urgency to ensure President Trump is not allowed to repeat it. Liberals have every right to fear that because Donald Trump is far better positioned than Bill Clinton was.
• J.T. Young served in the Treasury Department and the Office of Management, and as a congressional staff member.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.