ROFL. The Reform Party didn't exist in 1992. Get your facts straight.
20% of us got it right that year, the remaining 80% of you pissed away your chances to make real, substantive change in this country.
No, 20% of you decided to drink the MSM koolaid and get Clinton elected. Bush I was on the verge of a comeback until Peror re-entered the race. While I'm not a fan of Bush I, he still would have been better than Clinton.
Now you can get off your high horse and illogical defense of the Republicrat party and join the revolution
No one's defending the Stupid Party we're just being realistic. Look at what Ron Paul did, his ideas created a coalition that would have destroyed the Dems. Palin is doing the same - she is the three-legged stool that Reagan talked about and helped him win 2 landslides. The best way to advance conservatism is to wrestle control away from the Rockefellers.
ROFL all you want, facts are facts despite your continued ignoring them. The Reform Party existed in 1992, filed for and received ballot access in the '92 Presidential Elections and received 20% of the vote.
It was the 80% of you who were (and still are) "stuck on stupid" with the two-party system. Again, that's a fact and yes you are defending the Stupid Party despite your protestations of being "realistic." You're anything but. You and the rest of your ilk who continue to vote for the same corrupt members of the two party system are like battered stepchildren: You crave attention from the very people who continue to IGNORE you.
IMO this country faces one of two options: The revolution happens at the ballot box, or it happens with guns, bullets, tar, rope and feathers. If you think you're can affect a revolution at the ballot box by voting for the same party that's ignored you for DECADES then you're the one who's "drank the mainstream koolaid" especially if you think you can get the RINO's out of the Stupid Party.
Yeah, good luck with that.