The Myth of Perot's 1992 Presidential Candidacy

Feel free to discuss appropriate non-BYU/Sports related topics here. We ask you to respect other users, the Church, avoid soapbox postings, and keep it clean.
Post Reply
User avatar
snoscythe
Retired
Posts: 8811
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:52 am
Fan Level: BYU Fanatic
Prediction Group: CougarCorner
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 37 times

The Myth of Perot's 1992 Presidential Candidacy

Post by snoscythe »

Many point to 1992 and Perot's run at the Presidency to argue that a vote for anyone other than the GOP nominee hands the election to the Dems. That is absolutely false.

Exit polling on Election Day 1992 showed that 38% of Perot-voters had Bush as their second choice. An equal 38% had Clinton as their second choice. Perot's impact was de minimus on the final result as all the data pointed toward an equal split in his votes between the two candidates.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/ ... e9f2325d1/
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/05/us/19 ... trong.html

If anything, Perot's run benefited Bush in making the final outcome closer than it would have been without Perot's intervention. Prior to Perot coming into the race, the closest poll had the unpopular Bush 9 points behind Clinton, and most had him more than 15 points behind.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ross-perot-m ... -candidacy

The idea of a third-party or independent candidate as a spoiler gets run out every year by a GOP who wants to hold on to power, but Perot does not support that narrative. If anything, Perot supports the notion that there is a path for an outside candidate to win by pulling votes from BOTH parties, especially when two unfavorable candidates are trotted forward by the two major parties.


BlueK
Senior
Posts: 903
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 11:47 am
Fan Level: BYU Fanatic
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: The Myth of Perot's 1992 Presidential Candidacy

Post by BlueK »

Perot mostly pulled in votes from people disgusted with both parties who didn't want to vote for either, or who otherwise would not have voted. but the losing side always wants to make themselves feel better by saying an independent candidate kept them from winning. it' s the political equivalent of Uncle Rico. I've seen the data as well. It's just not what republicans want to hear though.


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble...
User avatar
BroncoBot
Retired
Posts: 9860
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:30 pm
Fan Level: BYU Fanatic
Prediction Group: CougarCorner
Has thanked: 68 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: The Myth of Perot's 1992 Presidential Candidacy

Post by BroncoBot »

The problem with that election, is that perot was the best choice.


jvquarterback
Heisman Winner
Posts: 2067
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:20 pm
Fan Level: BYU Fan
Prediction Group: CougarCorner

Re: The Myth of Perot's 1992 Presidential Candidacy

Post by jvquarterback »

Six weeks ago the libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson, was polling at 11%. He won the governorship of New Mexico twice so, unlike Perot, he knows how to run a campaign and won't drop out then re-enter the race. If he gets in the debates (15% threshold) I think he could win a few states.


If ye love the tranquility of servitude better than the contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Sam Adams
Post Reply