Let's see now, - did George win the war in '91? And very popular. The Christian conservatives on local / Sacto CA radio with their national guests were saying George had some `conservative' problems. Taxes, etc. He was very strong on ... ?? right to life, etc. But he may be vulnerable on some other issues. The conservatives were getting anxious / unhappy with George. I believe this was being said before '92.
But, who is going to vote for the alternative?
But the complaining continued into '92. Then Perot. But, if I'm weak on George, he is worth the vote to keep Dan Q.
It seems like it was summer of 92, maybe in the fall. George & Barbara, either live & in color / (or on tape) - nationwide, I thought. Barbara made it clear... ? they didn't need to win. She would be just as happy being a Grandmother in Texas... or Maine. She would be happy going to soccer games.
I can't believe it, on national TV. Whatever. My vote was now almost up for grabs, but there was still Dan Q. Until Dan Q. went a little mushy.
After the fact... Whose idea was that TV broadcast / script? Or, was it all Barbara? It took a lot of years for me to finally think that it may have been an intentional script to try to show them as down to earth, the common folk, etc. And soccer was so popular. To show they weren't to anxious to win. And maybe they were conservative `soft' to begin with. And felt they had to be more toward the center for the general election.
Yes, there was Perot. I think it was sometime after the election, that Rush made mention of "seminar callers".
So, in conclusion, I'll meet You half way: Yes, Perot, and seminar callers. But I think stronger conservative candidates -might- have made a difference.
And, my saying "Wrong -" was probably a little strong. For a few years I had vivid memories of that TV broadcast. And as people started with the "Perot" mantra to explain '92, I felt there was more to it.
See # 111