From: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com (Richard Wojcik,snake)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: The Games are Over, and Clinton is Going to Win BIG!!
Date: 14 Oct 92 17:17:58 GMT
Reply-To: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com
Organization: Research & Technology

In article 18403@oakhill.sps.mot.com, pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.143550.1650@cnsvax.uwec.edu> falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
>>    Bill Clinton will be the next President of the United States; accept it.

>I don't disagree with your analysis - it would be hard for Bush, or Perot,
>to catch up, and yes, Clinton is in the runaway position.
>But let's see what the rest of the debates bring.
>Maybe America will see through Clinton's act and realize how unfit he
>is for the Presidency.

If you accept that Clinton is going to win, then why don't you tone down the
abusive rhetoric a little and give him a chance?  After all, we are all in 
the same boat.  The important thing is not whether Democrats or Republicans
prevail, but whether our nation prevails.  As a very partisan Republican, you
will really be in a good position two and four years hence, when the Democrats
have to explain why they haven't solved all the problems.  Right now, Clinton
and Gore are promising economic recovery, but the entire world economy is 
tottering on the brink.  So it isn't likely that Clinton is going to be in a
position to implement all his ideas.  I expect him to spend the next four years 
trying to stave off an economic depression.  With both the legislature and the
presidency in Democratic hands, it won't be possible for them to blame poor
performance on a gridlock, veto-happy president.  They must turn things around,
and they know it.  

If Clinton is inevitable, then it serves no purpose to trash his character and
his ideas.  Our hopes now rest on his success.

>I am voting for Bush, because he has the best economic plan, one
>that will provide growth, jobs, more businesses and higher exports, he will
>provide the best leadership at home and abroad, and he will be the
>best to deal, both constructively and using his veto pen, with the
>next Congress.

The problem is that Bush *has* been carrying out his economic plan over the past
four years, and it hasn't helped.  We have *fewer* private sector jobs than
when he took office, and the deficit is worse.  He just seems tired and flat out 
of ideas.  

>BUT .... I wouldn't be scared of a Perot presidency; and I suspect
>neither would many Americans. Who knows, maybe Americans
>will turn to Perot as a Different kind of Change.

At this point, it is too late for Perot.  Frankly, he probably would have done
much more poorly if he hadn't bailed out of the campaign months ago.  Now he
comes back, having avoided months of public scrutiny, and proposes a plan that
will severely reduce the amount of capital flowing into the economy.  Traditionally,
you run deficits during recessions to try to counter the economic downturn.  Perot
wants to pay off the bill in a way that will drastically reduce incomes, wealth,
and jobs.  Which means that his projections of future revenues are probably on
the optimistic side, assuming growth in the economy.  That will only make it more
painful to reduce the deficit.  Clinton comes in with the traditional approach:
spend (his "invest") money during a downturn.  Take care of the deficit more 
slowly.  It may not work, but he is the best shot we've got at economic
recovery.

-----
Disclaimer:  Opinions expressed above are not those of my employer.

    Rick Wojcik   (rwojcik@atc.boeing.com)   Seattle, WA
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc