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 ...
Krinton reminded me of a few small town good ole boys who widely known to be worthless but somehow got away with most anything.
No democrat can best Trump.
Short of an economic meltdown (which by the way is why Bush lost) or some other black swan event of that magnitude before next November.
In the last 120 years exactly 4 incumbent presidents have lost re-election... and of those 4, 3 lost purely on the economy.
Not only will Trump win, but he will (just like every incumbent that wins re-election, except for Obama) get more votes both popular and electoral, than he did during their initial election.
The 2020 political dynamic is a repeat of 1972, with a 1984 economy at the incumbents back. Democrats are doa for the White House and they know it.
Ross Perot was an early promoter of stopping jobs leaving the country, a harbinger of Donald Trump.
Perot received 19.7 million votes.
Bush received 39.1 million votes.
Clinton received 44. 9 million votes.
Without Perot in the race, is is almost certain Bush would have won.
The left tries to say Perot took as many votes from Clinton as Bush.
Hard to know for sure. The media were certainly on Clinton's side.
Why would Clinton have lost in 1992? Would the GOP have won a fifth consecutive term in 1996?
Bush had extemely high approval ratings after the first Gulf war.
The economy was pretty good.
Why would Bush have lost?
Could the GOP have won in 1996?
I don’t know. How did Clinton win in 1996? All out partisanship on the part of the Media, fueled by desperation after the Republican revolution in 1994.
I think if Bush had won in 1992, Democrats would have won in 1994’s elections.
Democrats would have won in 1996; first time since 1976 with probably Gore or Kerry.
Gingrich’s revolution probably won’t have happened, or it would have been delayed until 1998....maybe.
Avoiding overly optimistic predictions is a good idea. However If the Democrats have miracles to pull off, what are they?
Very possible.
I should stop playing the “what if” game.
Only God knows...
The course we are on may be the best possible course...
Ditto with Woodrow Wilson. Truman didn’t get a majority. JFK didn’t, either. Carter barely did (50.08%).
I didn’t cite it, but I surely didn’t forget it. Bubba made a similar promise on taxes that he swiftly broke.
We expect that from the lying dems though.
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.