Perot Wins... another take

Okay, I know this is the most overused TL in the world, talking how he could get the amount of votes in the good old Electoral College, but I have another question, what would a Ross Perot administration look like? What would his cabinet be like, and what would his policies be?

I would think one thing would be a balanced budget amendment, and a question, Secretary of State Jesse Ventura?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Perot would have acheived absolutely nothing as President. Republicans and Democrats in Congress would have united to thwart any initiative he put forward, out of fear that his presidency could have lead to the creation of a genuine third party.
 
Perot would have acheived absolutely nothing as President. Republicans and Democrats in Congress would have united to thwart any initiative he put forward, out of fear that his presidency could have lead to the creation of a genuine third party.

So, no Balanced Budget Amendment?

I would think balanced budgets would happen anyways... would it be possible that, should Congress block any legislation, its popularity goes down and people elect third parties as a result?
 

Jasen777

Donor
Congress probably passes bloated spending bills just to piss Perot off. If he doesn't sign them then the government will get shutdown and that's likely a PR battle Perot will lose.
 
Congress probably passes bloated spending bills just to piss Perot off. If he doesn't sign them then the government will get shutdown and that's likely a PR battle Perot will lose.

But then, most people want a balanced budget.

What would his foreign policy be like?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
But then, most people want a balanced budget.

That's what they say to the pollsters. But if the pollster asks, "Would you support a Balanced Budget Amendment if it meant that [insert your favorite program here] receives less funding?", then the support for a Balanced Budget Amendment collapses.
 
That's what they say to the pollsters. But if the pollster asks, "Would you support a Balanced Budget Amendment if it meant that [insert your favorite program here] receives less funding?", then the support for a Balanced Budget Amendment collapses.

I cannot find any polls that ask that, though.

Still, the Balanced Budget was a pretty popular issue and I don't think the GOP and the Democrats can just magically "unite" like that.
 

Nikephoros

Banned
I cannot find any polls that ask that, though.

Still, the Balanced Budget was a pretty popular issue and I don't think the GOP and the Democrats can just magically "unite" like that.

They would if they both saw an advantage to doing so.
 
Perot would probably be a disaster. Having said that, his budget ideas could gain traction with the limited government (dare I say libertarian?) wing of the Republican Party.

Because of this I think his presidency would be particularly painful for the Republican Party, because Perot is going to be proposing reforms that would meet what many limited government, no taxes Republicans dream of. Also, his opposition to NAFTA is going to draw many unions his way, potentially even many democrats. Perot might be turn his nationalist, small government backlash into a real political movement. Cutting taxes and putting more tariffs on Chinese imports, all from the same administration.

So while the GOP has its core coalition potentially splitting apart the Democrats get to unite themselves against this crazy man who is seeking to tear down the New Deal. No healthcare debate, the Welfare Reform packages far too radical to be taken seriously, constant media attention against various amateur mistakes the Perot Administration makes, '94 and '96 look like interesting elections that could go the Democrats way.

Anyway, Perot would fundamentally change the way that the '90s political battles went. I think he would gain enough traction with some Republicans to cripple the GOP for several election cycles, and even once he is gone, his election will have created a movement that will change the balance of power in the GOP. His strong anti-free trade sentiments in particular will serve to really reshape the way the GOP works.

On the Democratic side, I see a retrenchment of the New Deal-Great Soceity liberals in the party. Clinton's triangluation and Republican-lite moderation probably won't hold sway, especially while Perot provides a worst case scenario for Democrats to point to. The Democrats could also get pulled in an anti-trade direction, in an bid to make sure that unions don't jump ship. Mario Cuamo '96? I can see as a year when a Northeastern liberal would have a really good chance of getting the nomination.
 
I think Mr. Corvinus has written one of the best description of the Perot adminstration I have ever read and I have read quite a few. It is a very common AH scenario. The one thing I know is the President Perot would be an incredible frustrated man. Here is a guy used to the power of C.E.O. now has to deal with the good checks and balances. He yearns for the power to fire Congress and replace them with his employees. He freguent calls for running government like a business shows he has never read the constitution. Our founding document created a government that would be inefficent.
 

Jasen777

Donor
But then, most people want a balanced budget.

That's what they say, but they don't want to cut anything to do it. When the Republicans made the last effort to have a truly balanced budget (no fudging with borrowing money from social security) after their '94 landslide, Clinton said no. The stalemate resulted in a government shut down in a huge P.R. victory for Clinton.

Here it'll be Congress pushing for higher spending. The two parties will work together to sink Perot. If Perot vetoes the bills it'll cause a government shutdown. Given that Perot somehow manage to get elected, perhaps the public will be behind him initially. But as soon as social security checks stop coming he's toast.
 
Top