Did the 1992 LA Riots hurt Bush?

[Bomster]

1968 was a tumultuous year, one of murder, injustice, and riots. The chaos at home and abroad in Vietnam made Americans lose confidence in the incumbent and his party, so Richard Nixon was able to come back from the political grave and win the 1968 election under a theme of "restoring law and order".

1992 wasn't as explosive as 1968, but it is marked by one of the most significant riots in history, the LA Riots. Sparked by the beating of Rodney King by police officers, people took to the streets in anger, causing mass rioting. The event was unprecedented, being documented live on TV.

Something both of these years have in common is that they both involved riots in cities and also an election. In both election years the incumbent party lost the White House. While Bush Sr's defeat is most attributed to economic effects, could it party be attributed to the LA riots? Did he receive flak at the time for it? Or was it irrelevant on the election?

[Rookie Yinzer]

Wrong forum.

[S019]

Wrong forum.

This, this probably belongs on the history board.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

He did receive some criticism at the time:

Within a couple of days, it was clear the mayor and governor couldn’t quell the unrest, even with National Guard troops and curfews in place. President George H.W. Bush felt he had to intervene. He sent in several thousand federal troops to restore order, a decision for which he was widely criticized. He also took heat for waiting five days to visit, especially from the Independent populist Ross Perot, who was the front-runner in the upcoming presidential election. By May 4, the violence had subsided enough that the curfew could be lifted.

https://millercenter.org/riots-city-angels

I don't think it made much difference to the election though. California was going Democratic anyway, and elsewhere people probably had other things on their mind by November.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Wrong forum.

This, this probably belongs on the history board.

No, it's fine here.

[mianfei]

I think that the Los Angeles Riots could have certainly hindered Bush, although owing mass incarceration communities most affected by the riots would most likely not have possessed many voters. Not to mention that these communities’ policy preferences were (and are) likely off the map compared to major party voters.

However, there is no doubt that trust in Bush Senior on law and order would have fallen after his failure in the Los Angeles Riots. Rural voters, always the most volatile, undoubtedly desired someone different because they could not easily forgive Bush for his failures in curbing racial violence. Critically, there was not one but two alternative candidates who could appeal to  rural whites – utterly unlike the post-Bill-Clinton era. This explains why Bush gained two-thirds of the vote in only seven counties, whereas Trump in 2016 did so in over half the nation’s counties. I would say, though, that in (many of) these rural counties Planned Parenthood v. Casey, decided two months later, might have been a slight counterweight because both Clinton and Perot were pro-choice.