You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #20: It's only speculation for Clinton apologists [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-13-11 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. It's only speculation for Clinton apologists
Clinton won with 43% of the vote to Bush's 38% and Perot got 19%. Clinton won 11 states by less than 5%. Without Perot there is no way Clinton got elected in 92.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -If the year was 1992, I would sign Ross Perot's ballot petition. LoZoccolo  May-13-11 02:15 PM   #0 
  - And if it was 2006, you would be supporting Joe Lieberman (I-3rd party)? n/t  Dr Fate   May-13-11 02:24 PM   #1 
  - Judging by my DU posts, which anybody can look up, I would not support Joe Lieberman.  LoZoccolo   May-13-11 02:30 PM   #5 
     - Judging by your OP, I thought you were expressing support for conservative 3rd parties.  Dr Fate   May-13-11 02:32 PM   #10 
        - I support ballot access for conservative third parties.  LoZoccolo   May-13-11 02:35 PM   #13 
           - I was just thinking back to your openly pro-DLC days.  Dr Fate   May-13-11 02:36 PM   #14 
  - perot = spoiler for the dems.  Hannah Bell   May-13-11 02:25 PM   #2 
  - Just like Lieberman's DLC sponsored run was a spoiler for the nominated DEM. n/t  Dr Fate   May-13-11 02:26 PM   #3 
  - Well not really  sharp_stick   May-13-11 02:32 PM   #8 
     - As far as the end results go, yes, really. The DEMS lost, the DLC sponsored 3rd party won.  Dr Fate   May-13-11 02:34 PM   #12 
  - That is demonstrably false.  LoZoccolo   May-13-11 02:30 PM   #6 
     - is it? demonstrate it then.  Hannah Bell   May-13-11 02:32 PM   #9 
        - Are you sure you want me to do this?  LoZoccolo   May-13-11 02:34 PM   #11 
        - You did?  LoZoccolo   May-13-11 02:37 PM   #15 
           - yes, i did. i don't much care what *you* believe, however  Hannah Bell   May-13-11 02:42 PM   #17 
  - Perot was a spoiler for Republicans in 1992 and 1996...  Ozymanithrax   May-13-11 02:30 PM   #4 
  - That is speculation.  LoZoccolo   May-13-11 02:31 PM   #7 
  - Since that time, it has been the best speculation...  Ozymanithrax   May-13-11 02:51 PM   #19 
  - It's only speculation for Clinton apologists  DefenseLawyer   May-13-11 02:52 PM   #20 
     - I agree with you here, and with the subject of the post to which I responded.  LoZoccolo   May-13-11 03:00 PM   #22 
  - my meaning was "a spoiler 'for' (for the interest of) dems"  Hannah Bell   May-13-11 02:48 PM   #18 
     - If you look at him on the issues...  Ozymanithrax   May-13-11 02:56 PM   #21 
        - ok, gotcha & agreed.  Hannah Bell   May-13-11 03:05 PM   #23 
        - Very true  leftstreet   May-13-11 03:11 PM   #24 
  - Ross Perot, on the issues...  Ozymanithrax   May-13-11 02:39 PM   #16 
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC