And that cheap shot was meant to discredit a 94-year-old man and all the praises heard at the service.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
George H. W. Bush dead at 94
- Thread starter Scarlett O.
- Start date
RighteousnessTemperance&
Well-Known Member
I felt the same way, but Bush really lost because of New Taxes and NAFTA, not Perot. Clinton won (without a majority) because of his charisma, Carville’s “The economy, stupid,” the MSM, and lying about NAFTA. He came out in favor of it only after the election.Oh, that little man made me so angry!I've always blamed him for Clinton going into office.
I disagree.
Nope, it was Perot. He siphoned off enough votes that Bush would have gotten had he not been on the ballot. The other thing that really bugged me about this election was Clinton's continual insistence that the economy was in "the worst shape it's been in 50 years." In fact a recovery was already underway, but he kept hammering it home and the media kept on reporting it as fact.
IMO, Clinton's 1992 run is the best presidential campaign (unfortunately) I've witnessed since taking note of such things in 1960. Shortly after the election was conceded, Dan Quayle said words something like, "If Bill Clinton can run the country as well as he ran this election, we'll be in good shape." Alas...
Nope. Trump.
Masterpiece. Beat the Clinton machine, the leftist media and the establishment republicans. No one else could have done it.
Last edited:
He was certainly the best at garnering free publicity from folks who didn't like him.
Re read my post . I edited it. Sorry so slow.
I am in the city at an old cafeteria looking out the window at our flag flying at half staff. The working people at this busy place with Christmas music playing would have liked President George H. W. Bush as one of them.
And he got that leftist media to unwittingly work for him.
Scenario - a change of 300,166 votes (0.29% of national total) in ten states from Clinton to Bush results in a victory for Bush. Georgia
click here for link
and then check out this article
click here for link
and then check out this article
He raised taxes after campaigning on read my lips, no new taxes. Of course, the Democrats did not keep their promise to cut spending, but then when we talk about Democrats we think about very low expectations and lying promises.
And he got that leftist media to unwittingly work for him.
Part of a brilliantly executed campaign strategy.
RighteousnessTemperance&
Well-Known Member
I like your post. It nearly echoes mine. Clinton charismatically ran on the economy with extensive help from the MSM (no surprise). Sounds like agreement there.
I agree Perot was a factor, but it was because he pointed out the serious problems with NAFTA, and Clinton hid his own intentions to support it. So, Bush was out on a limb with NAFTA and had really blown it with the new taxes. Those two huge mistakes were a fatal combination. Clinton took full advantage, and we’re still suffering.
RighteousnessTemperance&
Well-Known Member
OK, but this “discussion” is academic anyway. Maybe we could settle it with do-overs: 1) without Perot at all, 2) with Perot dropping out before the vote, and 3) with ranked-choice voting.
And he got that leftist media to unwittingly work for him.
I agree. How's that strategy going to work come 2020? Or will he need it?