From: fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis)
Subject: Re: I HEARD ROSS PEROT WILL BE BACK
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 13:30:36 GMT
Organization: Austerlitz, Gershovitz, and Carmichael

Brad Cote writes:
>fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis) writes:
>
>>Am I accusing Perot of running a similar campaign to Pat Buchanan's...i.e.
>>Buchanan ran to defuse a potential thorn-in-the-side, in-for-keeps campaign
>>by David Duke...I think the answer is "yes." Perot's former supporters
>>split almost 4-1 for Clinton when Perot dropped from the race. He is
>>in there solely to re-elect George Bush.
>
>But H. Ross Perot hates Bush with a passion. He also dropped out of
>the race on the eve of the Democratic Convention, saying that he
>"didn't need to run, since the Democratic Party was rejuvinated." This
>is as close as you can get to an endorsement without actually saying
>it. A month before Perot dropped out, Clinton was running third. 
>
>I think Ross got out for a number of reasons: 1) he saw that he could
>not defeat Bush in a three-way race, 2) he had no chance if the
>election went to the House, 3) he didn't like the glare of the press
>spotlight on his private life, 4) he really believed that he had
>raised an important issue (the defecit) which would have to be
>addressed by both parties (he was wrong there), 5) he didn't want to
>run the kind of campaign (as planned by Rollings and Carter?) needed
>to win a presidential campaign in the 90's, 6) he figured that with
>him out, and the timming of his quitting, would seal Bush's fate.
>

I think your analysis would be accurate if Perot had really intended
to drop out as you say. Perot, it turns out, had planned his return
as an "October Surprise." A fact reported in today's paper. I think
his return was dependent upon Bush's viability as a candidate: Perot
is as fine a self-flattering, competitor-constricting, multi-billionaire,
super patriot to live in certain neighborhoods of Dallas as you could
want -- but the man is a life long Republican and I just can't see
him doing this for even as conservative a Democrat as Bill Clinton.
Cui bono? If Clinton is elected with Perot in the race, the margin will
almost certainly be smaller than it would be with Perot out of the
race. Clinton would not be particularly beholden to Perot for that.
But this re-shuffles the deck on the chances for Bush. Always a ready
man with the old quid pro quo. Ask Saddam. And if Perot wins? He has
535 enemies just a mile down Pennsylvania Ave. Does Perot have a 
right to run. No doubt. Do his supporters have a right to vote for him.
Of course. Will there vote bring the result they want? I don't know.
There is a lot of thumb-your-nose infantilism about Perot and his
supporters. If they are serious about change...let them organize around
lots of other candidates who share their views...Senators, mayors,
dog catchers. Cause w/o the piddling everyday votes, Kiddies, you ain't 
seen grid lock yet. I think his supporters should look hard at Perot:
his vanity and willingness to unsubtlely go for the balls. It works
in business...lots of things work in business. But will it produce
the government they want. No.
patrio

-- 
Jeff Davis <davis@keats.ca.uky.edu> 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections