Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fieldmarshaldj

I would have liked to see what effect a Perot win would have had. Would a party have formed around him? Dole and Gore run against him in 96?

1994 wouldn’t have happened. Midterms with neither party in the White House?!


47 posted on 11/10/2008 8:00:39 AM PST by Impy (When he takes the oath of office will they say his middle name?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: Impy

Perot would’ve had a big problem having no party members to back him up and essentially both parties would’ve been instantly hostile towards him. He might’ve been more Dem leaning on Social issues (one reason I couldn’t support him at the time, my first legal election) and fiscally Conservative (towards the GOP). But whether he would’ve resolved his premier issue of budget deficits via tax increases or tax cuts to spur growth along with spending cuts, I’m not sure. 1994 may have ended up a wash, although the GOP may still have made gains depending solely upon where Perot was going.

Clinton, had he lost narrowly in a 3-way race, quite probably would’ve made a second go for the office in ‘96. His 1980 loss as Governor didn’t deter him to try again. Whether Dole ran might’ve been questionable, his reason for running was to oppose Clinton (for all we know, he might’ve been able to get along with Perot and stayed in the Senate), so perhaps Dan Quayle would’ve run as the GOP nominee.


52 posted on 11/10/2008 1:34:42 PM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson