Why did Perot do so well in 1996?

[Cubby]

Looking at the 1996 election results, I am amazed at how well Ross Perot did. He got between 5 and 15% in every single state. And the guy didn't have an actual platform. Nader in 2000 only got above 7% in 1 state!

I'm too young to remember Perot's ideas, but he seems to have been more useful for SNL parodies than as an actual candidate. Why were people still so drawn to him after his previous failed campaign? By 1996 the economy was greatly improved, did people not realize how good things were?

I was 14 that year, and while I followed the election (remember Phil Gramm? ugh) I wasn't too interested in politics, and I remember thinking why would anyone vote for an old (but nice) geezer like Dole when Clinton had everything going for him, a great economy and the new internet craze, the end of the Cold War, etc.

Why was there still such a large block of people that couldn't decide between Clinton and Dole? I just can't figure it out.

[Dr. Cynic]

Well Pym compared to his run in 92, he did downright terrible in 96.

[muon2]

Many of his campaign ideas in 1992 were popular enough that they found their way into Gingrich's Contract With America in 1994. Dole was not seen as part of the 1994 reform group, but some of that was tarnished from the 1995 goverment shutdown. Perot still had those disaffected voters who didn't accept the GOP reform of 1994, particularly those who were protectionist in foreign policy.