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

To: EQAndyBuzz
Yeah, but how did that translate into electoral college votes?

That question was being asked when Perot led in the polls that summer. Of course, it was never answered since Perot blew his lead and won on 19%.

But your snarkiness does not change the reality that an independent held a clear lead in a presidential race until he basically sabotaged his own campaign.

6 posted on 04/25/2011 10:57:49 AM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Will88

“But your snarkiness does not change the reality....”

Snarkiness? Hrrummph... I sir, resemble that remark.

Seriously, I was just inquiring. I know, “Yeah, but” is pretty snarky.


51 posted on 04/25/2011 11:54:43 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Will88
But your snarkiness does not change the reality that an independent held a clear lead in a presidential race until he basically sabotaged his own campaign.

One minor correction to your statement above.

The reality was that an independent held a clear lead in a presidential poll, which is nothing at all like holding a lead in a presidential election.

Polls tell us what the polled individual thinks what they may do, while elections count what actually gets done.

From where I sit, if 39% strongly favored Perot, why did half of them not return when he got back into the race? No one else was added to the list, IIRC. It was the same players both before and after he dropped out then in.

Clearly his support was extremely soft, which doesn't get factored in with poll results.

60 posted on 04/25/2011 12:44:30 PM PDT by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | 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