It is hard for me to believe that Perot getting 19% of the popular vote while running on a "conservative", reduce the deficit platform, did not cost Bush the race. Bush may not have deserved to win based on his poor candidacy and position changes, but Perot taking voters who were predominantly white males gave him no shot to beat even the hapless Clinton.
I also think Perot's true intentions to bring down Bush and the Republicans (if there was any doubt) showed later during the 1994-95 Contract With America fight. The Republican Congress put its neck out fighting for the bulk of Perot's platform against the Clinton's and the media. The Republicans begged Perot to speak out in favor of what were essentially his own positions, and he repeatedly refused and even subtly knocked the Republicans actions. I think his behavior during this time (and his running again in 1996), took away all doubts of Perot's intentions of wanting to elect Bill Clinton.
"It is hard for me to believe that Perot getting 19% of the popular vote while running on a 'conservative', reduce the deficit platform, did not cost Bush the race. Bush may not have deserved to win based on his poor candidacy and position changes, but Perot taking voters who were predominantly white males gave him no shot to beat even the hapless Clinton."
Consider the upside of Bush41 losing that election. It pretty much cemented the idea in Republican heads that you DON'T raise income taxes. Much of Bush43's support last year came because of his previous tax cuts, and that alone.
If Bush41 had raised taxes AND still squeaked by, then the lesson to the party establishment would be that they could GET AWAY WITH IT, from then on.
There needs to be consequences for bad GOP behavior.