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

To: Crystal Palace East
Spoilsport Perot handed Clinton the ‘92 victory.

That's ridiculous...Bush lost because many of the people couldn't stand the thought of him being President again...It's Bush's fault Bush lost...

You seem to think that had Perot not run, we'd have been forced to vote for Bush...NOT...

76 posted on 07/24/2015 5:57:11 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: Iscool

No kiddin’! It was a handoff.


77 posted on 07/24/2015 6:05:50 PM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

To: Iscool

No, no one would have been forced to do anything, but exit polls of Perot voters showed 68 to 73% would have voted for Bush had Perot not run.

Do some homework. Take 68-73% of the Perot vote in the states I mentioned, ones Clinton won by small margins, and add them to the Bush numbers. Give the other 27-32% to Clinton and “recount” the totals.

Bush would have won reelection handily, and there would be no Hillary.

Likewise, had Bush not gone back on “Read My Lips...” he would might possibly have won, but the history... and the math... is very clear; Perot assured Clinton’s election.

Ross Perot is no God.

No Perot in ‘72 = No Clinton.

No Clinton victory in ‘72 = no Hillary today.


79 posted on 07/24/2015 11:02:26 PM PDT by Crystal Palace East ("We Must All Hang Together, or Assuredly We Will All Hang Separately" B. Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | 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