1992 Presidential Debates

I hate how the Republicans infiltrated and destroyed Ross's Party

Basically the blue print to destroy any potential Third party
is send in the Pat Robertson types and their following
Take over the party
be loonies for 5 yrs
Everyone who truly beleive in the party leaves defeated, disallusioned and disenfranchised
then you go back to the Republican party . . .MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Rocket River

 

Man, those debates were endless fodder for SNL. Hartman doing Clinton and Carvey doing both Bush and Perot. Those were the days.

What about the Vice Presidential debates? Gore vs. Quayle vs. Stockdale. Lockbox vs. Potatoe vs. Who am I?

Who can forget that infamous "Who am I? Why am I here?" opening by Stockdale? The poor guy never recovered. He was a bonifide war hero and ended up just being perceived as a slow-witted, confused old man. At the time, it was funny, but looking back, it's really a shame.

 

He died of Alzheimer's about 10 years later. He shouldn't have been put in that position, that one's on that clown Perot.

 

From what I understand, he wasn't even told he was going to be participating until a week beforehand. 7 years as a POW and that debate is how he's remembered.

I just found this on Wiki:

 

carvey was all over perot and bush, hartman did the best clinton, snl will never be better.

 

That "clown" Perot has been proven largely correct with his financial policies and warnings. Sure, he was politically inept, but I wouldn't classify him as a "clown".

 

LMFAO are you serious with this sh-t? :grin:

He basically said the government was going to go bust in the 90's, and that super-Japan was going to take over, the US economy was going to die. He also had a lot of idiotic ideas about NAFTa and tariffs

Fast forward to the end of the decade we were running a budget surplus and the greatest postwar economic expansion in history (and it was not just a bubble, like the Bush years - there was a stock market .com bubble, sure, but there were real gains underlying it that didn't go away).

The things that are busting the budget now are not things he had any idea about or predicted or even existed in 1992 - two rounds of massive tax cuts and two giant-never ending wars.

He was about as wrong as wrong could be.

 

Back then, Perot was asserting that the solution to the 'drug problem' was as easy as going neighborhood to neighborhood raiding houses and arresting anybody involved with the drug trade. That is nuts. I'd never vote for somebody with so little respect for the people they're supposed to serve. Clinton was the best choice in that election. He did more to make the federal government transparent than any other recent President, and for that, all of his other shortcomings are less apparent. Of course, I wouldn't have voted in that election.

 

****on is awesome

 

Clinton.. oops honest typo.. accidently typed Cl!ton and it censored it.. but seriously Clinton was was way better than Obama or Bush.

 

dude, you don't have to keep putting republican and democrat together, for your i'm bipartisan stichck

we don't believe you need more people

 

like this thread you need more people

 

So what is your point? did I diss Clinton in that thread? Do you know how I feel about Clinton? I thought he was great. In that thread it was about Bush. I don't think Bush was a evil monster like a lot of crazy lunatic lefts on here.

Also what is up with your crap about me trying to pose as bipartisan? I have never tried to hide the fact I tend to vote conservative/Republican. I just realized over the year that this forum is mostly pretty stupid bickering back and forth and I decided not to participate in that crap. Also rezlied yes a lot of the radio stations, sources I use to listen to was pretty one sided so I decided to stop listening to that also. You should mellow out a bit. It will make your life a lot happier

 

Suspending your campaign when you're ahead in the polls and accusing the President of sabotaging your daughter's wedding seem pretty clownish.

Still unfortunate that the debates are somewhat jerry-rigged to prevent third party candidates anymore (15% or higher).

 

sorry for continually picking on you about it, but you do go out of your way to say i'm not a republican, i'm just criticizing said dem

also, I tend to find it funny (not necessarily you because i have noticed you just started posting here) that a lot of conservatives are backing off the bush support after his presidency started to look like one big fail in the last couple of year

 

I have to say this about perot, he was a very accomplished man with passionate beliefs, and those types sometimes tend to be a bit quirky

 

And then getting back in at the last minute while the incumbent is on a roll was despicable. Bush would have beaten Clinton if Perot hadn't done that. Perot got out during the summer before the heat was turned on him when Clinton was doing well in the polls. But when it appeared Bush would overtake him late, Perot got back in deliberately to jar his momentum (and it worked). I can still remember Bush being flustered answering questions about "Republican dirty-tricksters" the weekend before the election.

Perot was a total joke. If he had stayed in during the entire campaign the scrutiny would have destroyed him. He was a coward to bow out just when that started to happen. I had no respect for him whatsoever.

 

no too bad a prediction...he was only a few years off

 

samfisher's point is he was a few years off because of some mitigating circumstances, including a stupid tax cut. in the course of normal business, he was wrong.

the funny thing about him being wrong is the gov't made so much money off the tech boom, and perot's business was technology

still a very accomplished man