DBWI: H. Ross Perot re-enters 1992 U.S. presidential race and wins 20% ?

Maybe both the two major parties better hear the thunder of disaffected voters ? ? ?

But both competed energetically anyway on questions of economic growth and re-building middle-class jobs, and the last twenty-five years of U.S. economic history has gone extremely well with merely one minor recession.

So, frankly, I don't see much changing.

Do you?
 
Last edited:
Point well taken.

Yes, maybe Perot had more of an effect by not re-entering. Maybe that got enough of the war horses in both parties thinking, Holy Cow, if a non-flaky candidate appealed to these same economic issues . . . . . we as a duopoly of Democrats and Republicans might start losing control! :p
 
Doubtful. Polls showed that Perot took equally from Clinton and Bush. Clinton's campaign was so poorly-run and scandal-ridden that I don't see any way he could have won.
I've heard that he briefly considered picking Tennessee senator Al Gore, but he instead picked Governor Jerry Brown. Would Perot have reentered the race if Clinton chose Gore?
 
I think President Bush did okay in his second term. But I'll say he was mainly a pro-status-quo guy, even though I know some people will disagree with this.

President Bill Bradley was elected with much fanfare in 1996, maybe with too much fanfare and too high expectations. He's a cerebral guy who at times struggled to gain traction for his "bold experiments." And of course from Sept. 11th onward, foreign policy issues took up a lot of his presidency.
 
President Bradley did keep it simple and straightforward on health care. Starting the Fall of '97, his administration backed extending Medicare to persons aged 50 and above and persons 0-19. He instructed his team, it's going to be something understandable that people can debate around the kitchen table.

And he knew that persons aged 50 and above had at least heard stories of their friends facing job loss and discrimination. Plus, for some, the idea of early retirement was appealing, or at least the possibility of such, and not having to worry about healthcare.

Yes, this passed rather easily and the Bradley Administration made damn sure to vet qualified administrators.

But then, it was 2007 before we got Medicare for All, for crying out loud! Yes, I tend to think we could have done much better on this front.
 
Last edited:
Top