This guy just qualified to be Walsh’s running mate
1 Like
Perhaps from the exit polls, but Perot spent a lot more time attacking Bush during both the debates and his campaign in general than he did attacking Clinton. Remember this iconic moment of the 92 debate?
Who was that aimed at? Perot tore into Bush relentlessly in 92 and I think it weakened him considerably. Perhaps some of the people who supported Perot in 92 said Clinton was their second choice in the exit polls simply because Perot got them to hate Bush so much.
1 Like
Well, that didn’t take long, did it? He flamed out in days, not even weeks. It doesn’t take much to bring back the damning stuff he pulled in the last few years. I guess he was appealing to Bobby Jindal’s “stupid party”.
1 Like
That kind of thing can’t be discounted, certainly. Most especially, here in Florida, in Broward and Palm Beach Counties
1 Like
Wow—you make some assumptions that are—to put it delicately—wildly unfounded. Many Rs and indies who didn’t like either candidate in 2016 took a chance on Individual-1 last time. They likely won’t vote for him again—at least some of the Obama-Trump ones in the key states—but aren’t eager to vote for a D, necessarily. Jill Stein took more votes in the three key states last time, than the margin of victory in those states.
Your statement is at odds with recent history, the electoral college, and basic facts.
He doesn’t have a big following here in Illinois either. Remember, he couldn’t even win re-election in a red district.
And that didn’t last real fucking long
I was thinking more like maybe his mom and dad. He’s one of nine children, so he has brothers and sisters who might be willing to vote for him. His current wife might vote for him – his ex, I doubt it. His kids may not be old enough to vote but they’d probably be willing to campaign against him.
Anyway, IL-08 was redrawn in 2011 to make it less red. In any case, he won the seat from a Democratic incumbent in the Teabagger wave of 2010 so it wasn’t all that red to start with.
1 Like
Waslh has morphed…
Well, his name certainly has.
What I never see is how many of Jill Stein’s voters would have just stayed home if she had not been on the ballot. My conclusion–a lot. Maybe most of them. That’s what’s missed when considering what might have happened when there is a 3rd or 4th candidate. It’s not just a matter of choose 1 or 2, oh, wait, now there’s 3. A lot of the 3s are people who would not vote. And if Walsh runs, I would bet that an even larger percentage of any votes he gets (which will be very few) will come from those who would not vote if he were not on the ballot. So the Dem is not losing those. The rest of Walsh’s (few) votes will come from Trump people. Look at it this way: Who is out there who might vote for Joe or Kamala, or Cory or Mayor Pete would pull the lever for Walsh instead? I’ll give you a hint: you can count the number without taking off your shoes.
Again—let’s stop with the suppositions, faulty assumptions, etc and deal with what matters—numbers, data, and votes. US Elections are zero sum. 30 counties—maybe fewer than that—will decide the election. 2016–70,000 voters, spread across three states—that was the margin, that landed us Individual-1. He has a low ceiling, but a high floor—and his core voters aren’t going anywhere. A binary choice hurts him—a multitude of choices helps him.
The first fallacy is that elections are zero sum. As people can stay home (and often do), that is false.
I find myself increasingly attracted to systems where voting is required, and punishable under the law if you don’t. Given that I also believe in mandatory military service a al Switzerland or Spain or Korea I think it’s consistent of me – though horribly unpopular in the US on both counts and thus it won’t come to pass.
I still wish it would.