Eisenhower vs. Clinton

Oops! Almost forgot:

We here at "Hail to the Chief... to the Death" intend that this blog be for entertainment and wise-ass only purposes. We do not condone, nor do we encourage, violence against any president, former or current, living or dead, real or fictional.

Dwight D. Eisenhower
34th President of the United States
Served: 1953-1961
Ages during term: 62-70

ARENA EXPERIENCE: Eisenhower needed a tiebreaker to beat "President for a Day" David Rice Atchison in the 1st Round. It's the closest match we've had yet.

PROS: He's a tough former athlete who excelled at military tactics; so much that he oversaw the largest amphibious invasion in history. A lot of Nazis died on his watch.

CONS: He's in his 60s, so his age isn't really on his side. There's also the fact that despite his great military career, he has little experience with hand-to-hand combat.

Bill Clinton
42nd President of the United States
Served: 1993-2001
Age during term: 46-54

ARENA EXPERIENCE: Clinton faced fellow Southern ex-governor Jimmy Carter in the first round, and walked out with 80% of the vote. Suck it, peanut-boy!

PROS: An elusive character, Clinton's political life has see him play the Roadrunner to his opponents' Wile E. Coyote. He's also a young and dynamic presence (well, relative to the HttCttD bracket), unlike his competitor.

CONS: A quick scan of Clinton's curriculum vitae indicates that he's not always thinking with the head you normally want to think with, so to speak. Add to that his alarming history of getting confused when presented with simple words, and you gotta worry about the guy.

The Fight

Tony: All right. I'll concede that militarily, Ike has an advantage. Clinton never served, and Ike's track record is obvious. If you're Ike, you're thinking, "I've got this whippersnapper right where I want him."

And that's just the problem. Everyone always thinks they have Clinton right where they want him, and then suddenly Clinton is speeding off into the distance, and they're running off the edge of a cliff, realizing that they've run off a cliff, and subsequently dropping to the canyon floor below, possibly after holding up a small sign reading: "Help!" Clinton's the ultimate master at getting himself out of trouble. Now, add the fact that he's sixteen years younger than Ike, and then add the fact that Ike could barely beat out David Rice Atchison last time he was in the ring, and I think it's fairly obvious who's gonna win this one: the man from Hope.

Doug: Yeah Ike barely got by the 1st Round. Let me remind you, he was fighting someone who 1) was 20 years younger than him, 2) whose "post-presidency" included leading and killing anti-abolitionists. So Ike had kind of a tough draw, but he prevailed.

On the other hand, Clinton faced the guy who — according to some — nearly lost a wrestling match with a cutesy-wootsy widdle bunny rabbit. Clinton is in serious danger of resting on his laurels. Now he's going to have to enter the ring against an actual fighter.

Tony: Tough draw? Tough draw? Ike should've swatted that one-day-only punk aside like he unworthy upstart he was! Instead, it was a knock-down, drag-out battle that probably messed Ike up, but good. Clinton's got all the momentum coming into this thing.

Once again, Ike is facing down someone younger than himself. This time, that person has a distinct ability to get through tight scrapes. This time, Eisenhower's luck is going to run out.

Doug: Yes, tough draw. I'll repeat it, since you repeated your question. Yes, tough draw. Atchison is the only one in the pool who went on to kill people after his "term," so he's a tough guy. Our voters were deadlocked, so they obviously thought he was as worthy of a fighter as Ike.

Bless you, Internet, for your bring us pictures of Dwight D. Eisenhower as a boxer. (Image courtesy of these folks.)

Clinton, however, dodged the draft. Do you think Ike helped mastermind the Normandy invasion so that snot-nosed kids like Clinton could avoid serving his country? No. Ike's not going to take that garbage.
Tony: Of course, Ike then went on to fight the Normandy invasion single-handed, right? Oh, wait. No, he didn't. In fact, he never really fought in combat. Since Clinton didn't do that, either, I'd call their military experience (or lack thereof) a draw. Sorry, Ike. Meanwhile, Clinton is younger, healthier (by virtue of having access to late 20th-century medicine, at least), and knows how to get out of trouble at the drop of a hat.

Clinton's entire strategy seems to rely on his opponents getting over confident, then making mistakes. He probably takes a few shots from Ike, just to lull the guy into a false sense of security. Then, whammo! He crushes Ike like a bug, exits the arena, picks up his saxophone, and serenades the crowd for an hour or two.

And you KNOW what happens next.

Doug: Precedent-based shenanigans!

When you argued for Ike in the 1st Round, it was Normandy, Normandy, Normandy and me on the other end pointing out the he didn't do any actual fighting. I lost that match, so the fact that he didn't see any of the combat wasn't an issue.

Okay, fine. Now when I try to mention Normandy, you're quick to point out that he didn't actually fight in that battle. So now it does make a difference after all? Or are we just switching it up for what ever is convenient for you?

Regardless of Ike's involvement, he also has experience playing football for West Point. When Clinton was that age, he was busy not inhaling (he can't even toke properly). We probably shouldn't forget that Ike used to box as a younger man, which means that he has even the slightest bit of knowledge about how to fight, which is more we can say for Clinton. Clinton doesn't even know how to fight his craving for Big Macs. By the way, you know what's not good for your health (and could hurt your ability to fight)? A McDonald's-heavy diet.

Tony: Precedent-based retort! When you argued for Atchison in the first round, you wrote, and I quote, "it should be noted that it wasn't Eisenhower himself who swam on the shores and defeated the Germans single-handedly. No, there were 175,000 Allied troops there." So wait, when you're arguing against Eisenhower, it's okay for you to point out his lack of actual combat activities, but when I do it, it's not? Or are we just switching if up for whatever is convenient for you?

Boom, roasted!

And yeah, Clinton liked himself some McDonalds. But did he ever have a heart attack? Well, no, thanks to that quintuple-bypass he underwent after leaving office, but that's not the point. Unlike Mr. Heart Attack McStrokey over here, Clinton's going to be in good shape for this fight.

Doug: So, either way you cut it, I am AMAZINGLY BRILLIANT. I'm okay with that.

Tony: Pretty sure that's not what I said, but go on.

Doug: I'm totally fine with the admission that Ike helped mastermind, but not fight, the invasion. Anyone with that ability to plan out such a battle could easily take care of Clinton before the heart attacks or strokes even become an issue.

The Chief: Okay! Well, whether or not you support the calling of shenanigans, it looks like we've got a fight on our hands, and the polls are now open! As always, you've got until 9am, MDT on Friday to vote. So, get to it! And let's hear some comments!

Eisenhower vs. Clinton