Why was there a third-party surge in 1992?

[twenty42]

Ross Perot won almost 20% of the PV in 1992. It was an historic showing for a third-party candidate, eclipsed only by TR's 27.4% in 1912.

While most significant showings by third parties have historically been caused by schisms within one of the major parties (e.g. 1892, 1912, 1924, 1968), what I find interesting about 1992 is that Perot seemed to pull from both sides and really didn't have a demonstrable base on either side. From the data I've compiled on the election, Perot won 14% of Democrats, 21% of Republicans, and 30% of independents. This provided him with a unique cross-section of the vote, one which was very broad across the country but terribly inefficient in the electoral college.

What was it about the 1992 election that created such favorable conditions for a third-party to emerge? Was there a deep dissatisfaction with both parties and their nominees? The candidates of 2016 were historically unpopular, but third-party vote was only about 6% in that election...less than a third of Perot's 1992 total. Did Perot simply galvanize a large number of voters who would've stayed home in a typical bipartisan election? I'd say that's unlikely.

I've also always found it fascinating how good and bad Perot's campaign was at the same time. While attaining 19% of the vote as a third-party is absolutely remarkable, his inability to attain even a single electoral vote rendered his run pretty pointless. We know now that Perot's best performances mostly came from deep red and deep blue states, but this to me speaks of poor strategy. IMO, Perot's run would've been more effective had he focused on a winning a few states rather than running a broad national campaign.