|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 01, 2020, 01:34:05 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Past Election What-ifs (US) (Moderators: Quarantine Time with Finn & Jake, Apocrypha)
  No Ross Perot Candidacy In 1992 (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: No Ross Perot Candidacy In 1992  (Read 8181 times)
True Democrat
true democrat
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,369
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

« on: September 08, 2005, 09:57:17 pm »

I think the campaign would have started off with a moderately sized Bush lead in May (maybe 49-35 Bush or so).  Then, by the summer, Clinton wouldh have closed the gap to about 45-45.  However, by Labor Day, they would be tied, and by election day, Bush would win about 53-47 or 54-46.  I think Clinton would have stressed being the Southern candidate more.

I think it would have produced somewhat of an odd map, maybe something like this:



Logged
True Democrat
true democrat
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,369
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2005, 06:12:43 am »

I think the campaign would have started off with a moderately sized Bush lead in May (maybe 49-35 Bush or so).  Then, by the summer, Clinton wouldh have closed the gap to about 45-45.  However, by Labor Day, they would be tied, and by election day, Bush would win about 53-47 or 54-46.  I think Clinton would have stressed being the Southern candidate more.

I think it would have produced somewhat of an odd map, maybe something like this:





How does Bush win Wisconsin? It's a Dukakis state. It makes no sense for a state to vote for a weak candidate over Bush at a time when he was fairly popular, and then vote for Bush at a time when he was much less popular over a much stronger candidate.

I say Clinton still wins. Most of the support Perot got outside of the mountain west (besides protest votes) was protectionist Democrats.

Wisconsin barely voted for Dukakis, and that was probably only because of the farm crisis.  I think the economy would have been stressed a lot less during the campaign, and Desert Storm more.
Logged
True Democrat
true democrat
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,369
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2005, 09:37:48 pm »


Actual:
Clinton 41.13%
Bush: 36.78%
Perot: 21.51%

Split the Perot vote 61-39:
Bush: 49.90%
Clinton: 49.51%

If you look at Perot's support in Wisconsin 1992, it was extremely evenly spread across the state, but what is really telling is that his weakest counties were Dane, Milwaukee, Douglass, and the Menominee reservation - all highly Democrat areas.  Giving Clinton 39 percent of the Perot vote is generous.

You really just can't divide up the Perot vote.  When Perot dropped out, a lot of his voters went to Clinton.  If Perot were never in the race, Bush would not have gotten those voters.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines