Could George H.W. Bush have been re-elected?

My mom told me a big reason that George H.W. Bush lost re-election is because Ross Perot took away votes. My dad is a Republican and he admitted to me that because of how the economy had been bad in the early 1990s, he voted for Perot over Bush and Clinton.

By the way, I don't think Clinton was a bad president (aside from the Lewinsky scandal), but I really do wonder if Ross Perot affected George H.W. Bush's chances of being re-elected.

10 Answers

Relevance
  • 4 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    When Bush lost a second term, some Republicans I knew said he didn't really -want- a second term! Otherwise how could he get beaten by a philandering hillbilly? 8^O

    Ross Perot is also used as an excuse. But stats show that Perot took as many votes away from Democrats as he did from the Republicans.

    In politics the tendency is to repeat things you'd -like- to believe over and over, in hopes of making them 'true'. Both parties do this but the Republicans seem to have elevated it to a high art! If you look back 100 years you can see we only get a Democratic president after a Republican president has run the economy into the ditch. (With the possible exception of JFK, I think he was just more charismatic).

    Bush brought us into a recession and then was unable even to admit it and talk about it and say how he'd fix it. Clinton's motto 'It's the economy stupid!' showed his understanding of Bush's biggest vulnerability.

    • Ed
      Lv 5
      4 years agoReport

      Nintendo if that didn't do it the "Whip Inflation Now" button sure as hell did

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    That was and is something Republicans want to believe about the presidential election of 1992, but there is no hard evidence it's true. Analysis of November, 1992 election night exit polls, showed that Perot took votes away from both Bush and Clinton equally. Perot got the most votes in states with few electoral college votes. Perot actually received zero electoral college votes, even though he received almost 19% of the popular votes. That is likely because electoral college votes are usually all given to the top vote getter, and Perot was not the top vote getter in any state. Perot also attracted voters who were tired of the two-party system; those can be both Democrats and Republicans, and such voters may have stayed home, except that Perot was in the race. Some Republicans actually voted for Clinton that year because he appealed to fellow southerners and had an economic message that could appeal to Republicans.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    Pretty much every analysis I've seen of this comes to the conclusion that Perot didn't take enough votes away from Bush to throw the election. There are various reasons that researchers come to this conclusion, but apparently a lot of the Perot voters would have just stayed home, rather than voting for Bush, if Perot hadn't been on the ballot.

  • 4 years ago

    Well, he ran for office, so of course he could have been re-elected. And yes, Ross Perot did impact the election, it's hard to say he didn't.

    Twenty million voters, it's hard to say how they would have split, but Clinton was still ahead by almost 5 million and many states which Clinton won, were won by margins larger than Perot's vote.

    Maine would be a real toss-up though.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    Tell you mom GHW Bush lost in 1992 for two reasons:

    1) He ended the first war against Iraq too soon. (Blame Powell for that.) He left Saddam in power and everyone knew we would end up fighting him again (who knew it would be his own son.)

    2) No new taxes. You cannot say that, then cave to the Democrats and raise taxes, and then expect to win an election.

    In the end, he was a weaker president than Reagan and it killed him. Perot had nothing to do with his loss.

  • 4 years ago

    The economy at the time wasn't doing well and incidents such as the 1992 Los Angeles Riots didn't help his image any further. Also, a lot of people were hurt by his "no new taxes" campaign that Bush pledged when he agreed with the Democratic Congress to raise them anyway.

  • nick
    Lv 5
    4 years ago

    I had to force myself to vote for Bush. I believed he had squandered the Reagan revolution

    I gave serious consideration to Perot but ended up voting bush

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    That's the conventional wisdom- that H Ross Perot split the GOP vote both times, letting Clinton squeak by with a plurality in the popular vote. But he still won the Electoral College both times, so....

  • 4 years ago

    Yes.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    I g

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.