Posted on 04/12/2022 11:39:09 AM PDT by TakebackGOP
I voted for Perot - twice - and I’m proud I did.
“I know people like to bash the Bush Family, but GHWB was better than Bill Clinton.“
I disagree.
Perot elected Clinton which gave us Motor Voter and pay equity for government employees. Motor Voter totally corrupted our elections and the latter created a ever growing well paid cabal of government employees loyal to the Rats who fund them their bloated salaries and cushy benefits.
Uh, NO. Bill Clinton did far more for conservatives than Bush could have.
Still trying to figure out where the writer spells out why Perot was bad.
Talk about the Bush’s, Clinton, NAFTA and 9/11. Not much about Perot.
I was young when Bush Sr ran. Just did what my dad told...vote for the Republican.
Wasn’t till later that I learned what NAFTA really was, a gift to Wall St and the Donor Class, and why Perot against it.
If I recall correctly, Perot found a research “paper”, if you will, written by a college student that detailed all the programs in the federal government and the redundancy and waste that went along with them. If I remember, the federal government employed(s), ketchup tasters.
And he actually had a plan, it seems, to reel in FedGov and was willing to put it on the table and make some hard decisions, unlike just talking about it like the clowns we’re forced to vote for.....
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/09/29/business/perot-s-budget-cuts-how-he-d-do-it.html
We could have challenged RINOs sooner if Perot hadn’t ran. It took to the end of the GWB Presidency.
His candidacy was bad, because it didn’t change the Republican Party and caused Clinton to win. The GOP voted for NAFTA in 1993.
That’s funny, I voted for Bush and have regretted ever since that I didn’t vote for Perot.
Bush squandered much of the good that Reagan accomplished.
It is an article of faith that Perot cost Bush his re-election. I don’t think the survey data at the time supported that idea. Bush ran a very anemic campaign, almost as if he didn’t want to win. He lost in part due to his reneging on his “no new taxes” pledge; a mild brief recession which the democrats portrayed as the “worst economy since the Great Depression,” which was not true but the idiot masses bought it; and a de-emphasis on foreign policy after the end of the Cold War and the botched end of Desert Storm. Bush got 37% of the vote Clinton got 43%, so Perot took votes from both sides.
He didn’t want to win. He wanted to sink the GOP. Then in 1994, he started a really crappy talk show and ran against the Democrats his candidacy helped usher in during the 1992 landslide.
You probably would have had Clinton 4 years later anyway or maybe someone even worse
Perot said he made the decision to run after appearing on Larry’s King’s show when Larry said “Why don’t you run?”. That was a big lie. He had started setting up the run one year earlier. Perot just wanted to deny 41 whom he hated from being POTUS. For his personal animus against Bush he gave us 8 years of the Clintons. A pox on him forever.
” so Perot took votes from both sides.”
But he took way more votes from Bush than Clinton.
Sort of Teddy Roosevelt's Aryan German Anglo Saxon civilizing the uncouth heathen on steroids.
Reagan believe in individual freedom. The globalists all see it as western global imperialism vs communism, and after watching Trudeau I am not sure there is a whole lot of difference, except I think we have a much larger dose of nihilism on our side.
Perot was right on the debt and trade. Nothing has been fixed on those areas. He was right, and will always be correct. It was the gop and dems that sold out.
Bush failed because of himself. Perot killed him because he was right. The gop will never change. The spending will never stop, the debt will increase, etc. Only a fool will continue to support parties.
Perot was not leading at the time he dropped out. He did lead early in his candidacy; but by the time he dropped out his poll numbers were dropping and staffers were leaving. By that time, and when he later re-entered the race, all he could hope for was to be a spoiler (which he was, much to Bush 41's chagrin).
When is the GOP going to be reformed? When are RINOs going to be challenged by conservatives? All the RINOs I see being challenged are being challenged by other RINOs.
“Don’t assume Perot took votes from Bush.”
I don’t assume. I know he did!
No you don’t. Which I explained in the rest of the post and you couldn’t be bother to read it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.