Originally Posted by
fuego
He might have won if he hadn't flaked out. All he succeeded in doing was helping Bill Clinton get elected by taking votes away from Bush. He was Trump before Trump. But no social media then and he would have had a more 'peaceful' presidency.
Ross Perot echoed populist sentiments 25 years before rise of Trump, presidential historian says
By Charles Creitz
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pre...-rise-of-trump
Billionaire businessman and 1992 independent presidential candidate Ross Perot may have been President Trump's predecessor in terms of offering a populist, anti-establishment message to voters, according to a presidential historian.
Perot, who died Tuesday at age 89, also was not the spoiler in the election that figures in the George H.W. Bush re-election campaign made him out to be, Craig Shirley claimed on
"The Ingraham Angle."
"There's always been a populist strain in American politics," Shirley said, calling Perot "prescient" regarding comments he made about NAFTA....
....In another clip played by host Laura Ingraham, Perot said America, "cannot be the policeman of the world any longer."
"We spend $300 billion a year defending the world. Germany and Japan spent around $30 billion apiece."
In his interview, Shirley added Bush's loss to then-Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton was not because Perot entered the race and took part in the debates.
"Bush lost the election because he gave up the ghost on the Reagan revolution," he said, adding a late Republican pollster once told him the Perot vote appeared to come, "proportionally from Bush and Clinton -- Clinton still would have won [without Perot]."
He said there were voters in both parties who did not want to vote for either major party candidate, calling claims of Perot playing spoiler "a myth."....