On bus stops and primaries

[kodalai]

So, I used to be able to walk up to the bus stop closest to my house in about 15 minutes. I'd cross the bridge over the canal, cross the railroad tracks, walk through the park and over the hill and there I'd be. Sometime recently, however, they went through and put fences and padlocked gates across the bridge and canal. What the heck? The result of this is that I'd have to go around three sides of a square just to get up to the bus stop... more than doubling my walking time. Hiss!

It's just as efficient now to go to the next bus stop down, in front of Toyama Daigaku. It's an extra 40 yen per bus ride, which is lame, but on the other hand it's actually more pleasant to come through town on my way home. There's a conbini and other shops, and the university, so there are always people walking around and it's less lonely and isolated than walking through the park. In the snow. Uphill both ways!

I've started going to Japanese lessons at the CIC building every Tuesday night. I didn't go last night, though, because I was feeling sick and it was freezing rain, and I didn't want to make myself sicker. The caution does not seem to avail me, however: today I had to come home from work early (after my classes were done for the day) because it hurt to breathe and I was cramping so bad I could hardly walk. Feeling better now that I'm at home, drinking tea and eating oranges and will go to bed early.

In other news: Been following the primaries largely through political cartoons. The satirists seem to be harping pretty fixedly on the theme that if Hillary gets elected, she'll only be a mouthpiece for Bill, who will be the one really running the country.

One problem with this: Wasn't Bill Clinton actually an incredibly popular president, even despite the sex scandals? So how is the idea of him returning to the office in some form or another supposed to be presented as a bad thing?

Comments

[sharona1x2.livejournal.com]

So how is the idea of him returning to the office in some form or another supposed to be presented as a bad thing?

I have no problem with that. I thought he was a very competent president.

I hope you feel better soon!

[meritjubet.livejournal.com]

*shrugs* I don't claim to understand American politics (not being American and all) but it seems they don't want the president to be a co-president which is what some people think will happen if Hillary Clinton is elected to be president.

That and politics is a dirty business and Bill Clinton hasn't been mincing his words recently.

They padlocked the bridge? Hmm, maybe people were jumping off it? Good luck finding the best station for you... efficiency or pretty sights, a hard one.

[kodalai.livejournal.com]

Hmm, maybe people were jumping off it?

LOL! It's only ten feet long and only five feet high, I doubt it. ;)

[okaasan59.livejournal.com]

They said the same thing about Hillary when Bill was in office.

[okaasan59.livejournal.com]

Also I don't know that you could say he was "incredibly" popular. He had (and still has) a very loyal, vocal fanbase but most conservative voters didn't care for him and a lot of those who originally supported him got turned off by the whole sex scandal/lying under oath deal.

[kodalai.livejournal.com]

Also I don't know that you could say he was "incredibly" popular.

According to the polls: "Clinton left office with a 65% approval rating, the highest end-of-presidency rating of any President that came into office after World War II. "

Comparisons:

Bill Clinton (2001) 65%
Ronald Reagan (1989) 64
John F. Kennedy (1963) 63
Dwight Eisenhower (1961) 59
George Bush (1993) 56
Gerald Ford (1977) 53
Lyndon Johnson (1969) 49
Jimmy Carter (1981) 34


And of course George W. Bush... 31

(Source: NBC/Wall Street Journal)

[ayelle.livejournal.com]

Many Democrats had/have mixed feelings, though. He was very popular and successful (depending on how you define it), but he was centrist, pro-corporate, brought us NAFTA and welfare reform and other anti-progressive measures. Much of his success as a president came from the fact that he had a lot of the power of big business behind him.

Also, my understanding (and I could be wrong or misunderstanding) is that particularly in Washington, many who had issues with Clinton policies were simply afraid to speak up because he was so popular/powerful. I believe similar dynamics have been at play in Hilary's career in the Senate. Even now the Clintons are unlikely to forget who supported them and who crossed them in their runs for office. They also owe a lot of favors (or at least that is how they are perceived). So how the public felt about them and how other politicians/political cartoonists feel about them may be somewhat out of alignment.

Americans are also wary of things that feel like dynasties. I'm certainly wary of handing the presidency off between two families for a potential two decades of American history.

I think okaasan59 is also right on -- people are frightened of them specifically as a team. It seems you can't take on just one of them in a fight, and they're both heavy hitters.

Much of this is speculation/supposition, not assertion of fact. My ideas about this may be considerably distorted by the fact that I wasn't paying close attention or didn't have enough background to understand everything that was going on when Clinton was actually in office, so a lot of my ideas are coming from other sources which may or may not accurately reflect the reality.

[kodalai.livejournal.com]

Well, I don't disagree with your analysis, simply pointing out where I got the "Clinton as a popular president" idea from.

[ayelle.livejournal.com]

Indeed, you are quite right.

[okaasan59.livejournal.com]

Wow, I didn't realize that. And Reagan and Kennedy are only one and two points behind. I also could never figure out why Jimmy Carter's approval rating wasn't higher.

[kwycksylver.livejournal.com]

Because everyone thought he wimped out with the hostage situation in Iran.

[aging-parents.livejournal.com]

"so a lot of my ideas are coming from other sources which may or may not accurately reflect the reality" Why, who could you be referring to?

Well, now that Edwards has given in to the realities of lack of corporate funding and lack of corporate media attention (and Kucinich, a much longer shot, left the race even earlier), we will all have to decide between Hillary and Obama. I have encountered much to make me uneasy about each; but in the end, I will probably come down on the side of Obama (it's not easy to forget the anti-liberal aspects of Bill's presidency; and I also don't like the suggestion of dynasty inherent in Hillary's candidacy). Ah well, I will jump off that bridge when I come to it; and I suggest you do the same.

[kodalai.livejournal.com]

"so a lot of my ideas are coming from other sources which may or may not accurately reflect the reality" Why, who could you be referring to?

Huh?

[ayelle.livejournal.com]

> "so a lot of my ideas are coming from other sources which may or may not accurately reflect the reality"
That was me. And I mean my friends' blogs and the articles they link to. :) Info from you I trust.

[nekojita.livejournal.com]

I'm not too sure about the Clinton thing either - you'd think it would appease some people who would feel that Hilary wouldn't have enough experience or something.