From: cah@tyr.JPL.NASA.gov (Allen Halsell)
Subject: Re: PDII - strike two on Bush
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 15:46:19 GMT

In article <1992Oct16.051854.19291@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov>, mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Richard Mulac) writes:
> 
> Second last place - the debate format.  What hole did they dig the audience
> members out of?  Every question asked has been answered several times in
> the past by the candidates.  Some of the questions had been asked in PDI.
> One of the most irritating things about this election is how in vogue the
> statement "address the issues" has become.  I don't need to hear for the
> tenth time how Bush is for school choice and Clinton is for spending more
> money on public schools.  I don't need to hear about Bush's lead in Desert
> Storm and Clinton's rebuilding of the infrastructure.  We all know what
> each candidate plans to do - let's find out what makes each man tick with
> more personal questions. 

I thought the format was ridiculous at first.  But the "debate" turned out
great.  As it turns out, most people don't want to hear about personal
questions, they want to fix the country (where have I heard that before?).
What else is there but the issues?

> Fourth last place - Bill Clinton.  Saint Willie is making his appearance
> early this year.  Every answer was tax the rich and spend, spend, spend,
> [...]
> and spend.  All too obvious his playing to the camera.

In your opinion, not mine.  I thought Perot's folksy manner was much more
faked and artificial.  Now that we know he lied to us about leaving the race
he's just another politician, albeit an unexperienced one.

It was clear to me that Clinton was the only person actually listening to
the answers of the other candidates.  Bush just sat around and grinned or
hung his head, and Perot was pretty much the same.
 
> First place - Ross Perot.  Real sincerity.  I've stated in previous posts
> that I don't want my taxes raised unless spending was cut.  He's a man who
> would do it.  It looks like my vote will hinge on what Perot has to say in
> his last infommercials and how he does in the last debate.  Whoever is
> ahead in the polls come November 3rd, Bush or Perot, I'll vote for that
> man.  Anyone but Clinton.
> 
> Two questions.  
> Will Perot find some way to replace his running mate before the election 
> (Colin Powell would wrap it up for him)?

How exactly will this work?  Stockdale is on the ballot in CA; Powell is
not.  Besides, what's so great about Powell, really?  A great resume?
Do you know anything about him besides how he looks?

> and
> Constitutionally, could a candidate pledge his votes to one of the other
> candidates on election day (Bush to Perot, or Perot to Bush)?  Stranger
> things have happened.

I'm having trouble thinking of one.  Perot and Bush linking hands to
defeat Clinton?  Yeah, right.  They're such good pals.

As a frequently-disappointed Democrat I would like to advise you to
be with friends on Election Night; it's tough to feel like the country
is going down the tubes and to have the nation embrace it.  1980 was
AWFUL.

*********************************************************************
the only thing that speaks the truth is the eloquence of passing time
               the spoken word is a jacket too tight
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle