Posted on 10/18/2019 8:24:48 PM PDT by GuavaCheesePuff
Presidential elections are not canceled because the incumbent President is skyrocketing in the public opinion polls. As a result, Democrats are putting on their game faces and beginning to confront the hard realities of the 1992 campaign. This is still a pessimistic party as President Bush basks in the afterglow of the Persian Gulf war. But personal ambition and party imperatives are beginning to produce a few signs of life among the Democrats. "I will admit that today it looks somewhere between unlikely and impossible that a Democrat will win the Presidency," said Robert S. Strauss, chairman of the Democratic National Committee in the Carter Administration. "But six months from now I don't know what it will look like. They haven't called off the election, and as long as it stays set there, the Democrats should field someone who can responsibly make the case on the issues the country must face."
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I posted this because a lot of people here on FR and some voters think that no Democrat can beat Trump in 2020 because they are horrible candidates.
The 2020 field reminds a lot of people of the 1992 Democratic field.
Clinton emerged from nowhere; remember all the big dogs the Democrats had were thinking of running in 1996 (Gore, Cuomo, etc.)
GHWB was a RINO backstabbing loser.
Trump isn’t.
L
It was so bad for Democrats in 1991-1992 that they considered bringing back George McGovern to run in 1992!
In recent weeks, George McGovern, who led Democrats to a landslide defeat in the 1972 election, has been one of the most visible Democrats testing the waters.
Democrats know that in 2020, Hillary is finished. She ain’t running again. Michelle O?
People need to admit that Clinton/Gore ran a effective campaign in 1992, and no, Ross Perot did not spoil the 1992 election.
When Bush failed to have a signature issue after the Gulf War, he did not capture the heart of Americans.
Like it or not, Slick Willie was popular with a lot of women.
His wife, Hillary, however, is not popular and still thinks she can mount a 2020 presidential run.
Believe it or not, this field of candidates are even worse. It was Bush’s election to lose, well son of a biotch, he did. But you are comparing apples to oranges.
Not with this woman. However, I have heard that BJC is extremely charismatic in person. I think his rallies were effective and GHWB was a country club Republican who was very out of touch. BJC may have been out of touch, too, but he came across to the masses as a down home boy.
You have a poor recollection of 1992. Perot DID spoil that race, and 1996, too. He took most of his votes from those who voted for GHW Bush in 1988. Bubba the Rapist actually performed WORSE than Dukakis did in 1988. Dukakis got almost 46%, Bubba got 43%.
Perot was actually leading in the race (with Bubba in 3rd place) when he withdrew in the Spring, proving his candidacy was a total joke, and that he didn’t want to win, he just wanted to prevent Bush from winning. He accomplished his goal. Sadly, his refusal to get off the ballot in 1996 also kept Dole from winning (had Dole picked up the Perot votes, he’d have narrowly beaten Bubba - who never got 50% of the vote either time he ran).
GHW Bush ran a horrible reelection campaign, and did appear badly out of touch. Not having Lee Atwater (who died during the interim) to run it showed. Atwater would’ve obliterated both Bubba and Pea-Rot, just like he did to Dukakis in 1988. I consider it Reagan’s worst decision to have picked Bush for his VP, and all the damage he and Shrub did, both to the party and the country, and bookending the Clintoon and Zero regimes, has been incalculable. This isn’t the same country we were 31 years ago, it’s an ugly and depraved war zone.
NO! Stop this “Michelle O” nonsense!
She is a millionairess in luxurious, perhaps tropical, settings dining on lobster enhanced by flown-in butter from Norway right now while we go for our next beer.
She does NOT want to be President!
.... and no, Ross Perot did not spoil the 1992 election.
_________
Utter BS.
Plus, the media had a lot more control in 1992.
RINOpuff is “concerned.”
If Trump raises taxes after promising not to and puts the country into a recession then yeah, good chance he’ll lose like Bush did. I don’t see that happening though.
You have a poor recollection of 1992. Perot DID spoil that race, and 1996, too. He took most of his votes from those who voted for GHW Bush in 1988. Bubba the Rapist actually performed WORSE than Dukakis did in 1988. Dukakis got almost 46%, Bubba got 43%.Perot was actually leading in the race (with Bubba in 3rd place) when he withdrew in the Spring, proving his candidacy was a total joke, and that he didn’t want to win, he just wanted to prevent Bush from winning. He accomplished his goal. Sadly, his refusal to get off the ballot in 1996 also kept Dole from winning (had Dole picked up the Perot votes, he’d have narrowly beaten Bubba - who never got 50% of the vote either time he ran).
Isn't it amazing that so few people know that Bill Clinton was elected president two times without a majority of the popular vote.
And you both are forgetting the most thermonuclear gaff ever, “no new taxes”. A huge broken promise during a pitiful recovery from recession. Lots of voters were pretty P-Od about that.
i agree...people best not get complacent and better start to play like we are behind...the President is damn sure doing that...
I can think of several dim wacko wymmyns that are still gaga over bubba jeff.
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.