Perot Presidency?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 03:02:13 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Past Election What-ifs (US) (Moderator: Dereich)
  Perot Presidency?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Perot Presidency?  (Read 2400 times)
Governor PiT
Robert Stark
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,631
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 30, 2006, 06:32:26 PM »

What would a Perot presidency be like if ge got elected in 1992?
Logged
TomC
TCash101
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,976


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2006, 09:05:42 PM »

Interesting. He might have gotten some progress made in balancing the budget, but a lot of his agenda would not have passed because Congress would have disapproved. Also, NAFTA probably would not have passed without the support of the WH.
Logged
merseysider
militant centrist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 524


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 22, 2006, 09:59:00 AM »

I suppose a possible guide to what a Perot presidency would have been like would be Jesse Ventura's governorship in Minnesota.

Perot probably wouldn't have been an awful president, but I doubt he would have got much done, and would probably not have run for a second term. Whoever picked up the third-party torch in 96 would probably have got a decent vote by third-party standards, but not have come anywhere near to victory.
Logged
Governor PiT
Robert Stark
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,631
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 23, 2006, 12:10:49 PM »

If Perot won in 1992. He would probably run against Al Gore and Bob Dole in 1996. Than Ventura may of been his sucessor in 2000 and ran against Bush and possibly Gore or Bradley. Gore or Bradley would probably win, but if Ventura won than he may of ran against Kerry and McCain in 2004. By 2008 the Republican Party may have become obsolete, in this scenario?
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 24, 2006, 05:05:55 PM »

I suppose a possible guide to what a Perot presidency would have been like would be Jesse Ventura's governorship in Minnesota.

Perot probably wouldn't have been an awful president, but I doubt he would have got much done, and would probably not have run for a second term. Whoever picked up the third-party torch in 96 would probably have got a decent vote by third-party standards, but not have come anywhere near to victory.

Nah, he'd probably do a bit better than Ventura... he had decent relations with the press, right?  And could he compromise once in a while? Wink
Logged
NewFederalist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,143
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.87, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 24, 2006, 05:23:35 PM »


Nah, he'd probably do a bit better than Ventura... he had decent relations with the press, right?  And could he compromise once in a while? Wink


I think the media thought he was a kook. His blather about the CIA trying to spoil his daughter's wedding and all that turned most media folks against him. As for compromise... ask the people on the GM board of directors he served with after selling EDS.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 12 queries.