Presidential election 1992 WI

Hyperion

Banned
In 1992, Ross Perot came in a strong third party candidate to Bill Clinton and Bush Sr. One of the faults mentioned that may or may not have hurt Perot's candidacy was a temporary withdrawal from the race midway through the year.

Suppose that Perot, for whatever reason, chooses not to drop out, and instead decides to see the whole thing through, as opposed to quitting and rejoining the race some weeks later.

While he still may not win, could he have more success over one of the two main candidates in any local or regional areas? Maybe pick up a couple of smaller states?
 
He did extremely well, despite the fact he dropped out for six months. Imagine how he would have done had he not done that. He got second place in a few states including Maine. He would possibly been able to get 1st in the popular vote too.
 

wormyguy

Banned
If he won the popular vote (most likely with a plurality), he would still have been unlikely to win the electoral vote. The vote would have gone to the House, who would have picked Clinton (being controlled by the Democrats). However, this "undemocratic" act would probably hurt the Democrats' popularity quite a bit, and combined with the massive legitimacy bonus conferred by winning the '92 elections, the Reform Party would be poised to become a major competitor in the '96 elections, and would supplant one of the two parties (if it's the Republicans, then Reform-Democrats is interesting - the religious right may turn to the Democrats in time for 2000. If it's Reform-Republicans, then short-term conservawank until a 4th party emerges. The Reform-Green party system, anyone?)
 
Top