Anyone old enough to remember the appeal of Ross Perot?

[Toots]

He did not use "sound bites" or treat people like children. He was a straight shooter that used half hour long "infomercials" to explain how America was headed toward economic disaster. He used very informative charts and accepted CBO figures to drive home the fact that we needed to stop the hemorrhage of money and the rapid rate that wealth was being accumulated by the few at the expense of the many. Although Ross Perot did not win he showed he had a winning formula. He really got people's attention. And within a few years we actually had a balanced budget and a start on paying off the debt. Most people did not vote for him for pragmatic reasons and not because he did not address their concerns. Why can't we find a candidate that can do something like that? The people need more than a five second "sound bite". We need to start treating people as adults instead of helpless children like the Republicans do. According to Republican philosophy People have to have someone to take care of them and tell them how to behave. We should not accept that as a premise. Treat people with respect and no telling what may happen...

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. He was pretty conservative also

He sure didn't appeal to me. :shrug:

[Toots]

3. Nothing he said about how government was out of control appealed to you?

:shrug: Different strokes...

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. Not really

I always considered the source. I thought he was a crazy little rich man who had enough money to finance his own presidential campaign. I really didn't agree with much of his platform. I also thought he seemed to be more style than substance.

But I certainly did understand his appeal. I knew quite a few people who voted for him.

[Vidar]

11. Only "crazy" thing he said was that the CIA were after his daughter,

which in retrospect just seems par for the course with the bush crime family.
Not to mention the successful commando rescue that he financed to get his people out of Iran while the embassy hostages languished. Clinton later Incorporated many of Perot's ideas successfully. I miss the little guy

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. Well I thought he was crazier than you did apparently

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I am very glad he wasn't elected. I honestly don't believe he would have made a good president.

[Vidar]

31. No problem

[Carni]

20. When I found out he was the guy behind EDS I was totally turned off

I vaguely remember at first thinking his attitude was refreshing but then when I found out about the EDS thing I thought screw him and voted for Clinton.

I knew a bunch of people who worked for EDS in the 80's and their company policies were horrible--bushco would have approved of the endorsed spying, mind control bullshit and whatever else I was told that was happening at that company.

My husband and my mother in law however thought he was like some sort of refreshing anti-givernment crusader and they both voted for him in that election cycle.

I think his campaign schtick was pretty appealing... but I don't believe he was actually sincere.

I was just thrilled that he took votes away from Mr Rogers.

On edit: Did he drop out? I could have sworn my husband and MIL voted for him?

[Buns_of_Fire]

44. (EDS' company policies were STILL horrible in the 90's!)

I worked for them twice as a contractor -- once for three days and once for six months. Lordy, I could tell you stories -- but you've probably already heard them all...

EDS, when I was there, was still very much in the mold of its founder -- arrogant, paranoid, and perhaps just a wee bit tetched.

[Carni]

48. Weren't there people dying in their training programs?

I can't recall all the stuff i heard but it was pretty bad!

[vi5]

2. It was more or less the same appeal as Nader and all 3rd party votes

People like to think they're doing something different, subversive and against the grain. It was the same "Oh there's no difference between the political parties" shtick that all 3rd party voters pull.

[Toots]

4. And you obviously never listened to a thing he said.

:shrug:

[vi5]

22. Oh really?

Did the title of the original post not ask if anyone remember the "appeal" of Ross Perot? I answered. Yes, I am old enough, and this is what I think his appeal was. I didn't say whether any of his ideas were good, bad, right, wrong, whatever. His appeal was that he wasn't one of the other two guys. Nobody actually believed he could win, but they voted for him any way, presumable to send a message. That the message resonated and Clinton adopted some of his plans and policies and ideas is irrelevant. People vote 3rd party to "send a message". Whether it's Perot, Nader, Larouche, or whoever. And that's fine. But I'm not going to pretend it's not true.

[Buns_of_Fire]

6. Every time the subject of NAFTA comes up

I think of Perot and his "giant sucking sound" comment.

[MrBenchley]

7. What a pantload he was....

Dana Carvey did a great job catching the sort of craziness he projected.

By the way, the most hilarious thing about him and his "movement" was this: Perot was a billionaire who had made all of his money by soaking American taxpayers. His company's only client was the US government. He sold his company to GM for $2.5 billion and a seat on the board, and they paid him $750 million more to pipe down and go away.

http://www.famoustexans.com/rossperot.htm

[Carni]

21. Yeah that's what I thought when I found out his background

It didn't sit well with me.

I did like the fact that he screwed GM lol

[Kahuna]

8. "Appeal?"

:rofl:

[x-g.o.p.er]

47. At one point right after he entered the race...

he was leading Clinton and Bush I. He did have appeal, but it was a white-hot type thing. When it waned, it went pretty fast.

[stray cat]

9. What percentage of the vote did Perot get.

I remember he did pretty well - people were in the mood for a candidate that seemed to speak straight about real issues. If he could do it, I think alot of good third party candidates that appeal to the right and left could do well in a general election if they could compete monetarily.

[Greyhound]

10. I think he got 10% - 12%, and that was after he dropped out, "exposed"

the plot to do his family in and showed himself to be bat-shit crazy. His message was very straightforward and represented a fundamental change in the way government should operate.
BTW while I disagreed with several of his points, but he has been proven right on most of them.

[Toots]

15. Actually it was nineteen percent, almost twenty million voters

and most here will say they were Democratic voters. Whenever the Republicans squeal that Perot was the reason Bush lost there will be a big outcry from people here saying it has been proved more people would have voted for Clinton than Bush had Perot not run. I voted for Clinton and do not regret that vote but I did pay attention to what Perot was saying and agreed with almost all of it. At least the economic issues he raised. People here who say they don't agree or did not agree probably never listened to him. It is pretty damn hard to disagree with factual evidence and all the charts and graphs he used to demonstrate his case were backed up with official government figures.

[Greyhound]

16. And when was the last time you heard any politiwhore say anything

as honest as his "people like me (uber rich) don't pay taxes"? I thought he was pretty refreshing and until he exposed himself to be such an amateur was considering voting for him. After he dropped I switched to Clinton.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

12. I remember him, didn't find him that appealing in the long run

Or his policies etc.

I remember his moment in the debates, "I'm all ears."

[RagingInMiami]

24. That's the only quote I remember from him

My republican mom voted for him before voting for Clinton in 96, Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. Perot was the first time she did not vote republican since arriving in this country from Colombia and being influenced by my American-born, republican father.

She still a registered republican, but only because she hasn't gotten around to switching parties.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

45. Hehe. It was his most memorable.

Good for your mom!

[tjwash]

13. He was also a huge contributer to the Bush family...

...and poppy Bush gushed, and kissed Ross Perot ass all during the '91 debate. The funniest thing Perot said was "we have to stop this practice of everyone greasing congressmen and senators for favors" when HE was the biggest offender of that. Everyones bullshit detector went off hard on him when he started with that.

Although the Big-Dog won because of Ross P. so I will always have a sort of soft spot in my heart for him...

[Laelth]

17. FACTS

Facts, plain and simple, were the source of his appeal. He focused the election on facts, and when that happens (as we and the Repukes well know), the Democrat will win (cuz we're sane, and they're not).

imho

-Laelth

[leesa]

18. I remember Ross, can't remember the appeal part. I DO remember that

he helped the energy barons rip off California to make a buck.

[Generator]

19. Good lord! I remember that voice

It was enough to have me run screaming from the room. Seriously, I would not have been able to take listening to that for any length of time. Almost as bad as Reagan's. The tone just not meant for human ears.

[ikojo]

23. He didn't appeal to me either. I could see how conservative

he was on social issues. He berated government spending but it was through government spending that he became an incredibly wealthy man, via Medicare contracts.

[radio4progressives]

25. Isn't it really the Point of the OP about the power of "Clarity" ?

If I were a gifted writer, I would write a polemic on the Power of Clarity .. it seems to me, (i don't think i'm alone)that one of the most infuriating, frustrating points of contention we (rank and file) have with our own party leaders is the insufferable poverty of CLARITY when ever we see them in television interviews, holding press conferences or other public appearances - even among those whom we hold some level of esteem for, we share a collected frustration with thier public appearances - we might like their voting records, but cringe when we see or hear them responding to the major issues before us, due to a very strange absence of clarity.

This is not an argument for "absolutism" or "purism" , this is an argument for the need of crystal clarity when speaking on principles, and on specific issues.

This morning, I caught a little bit of Bob Scheiffer's interview with my Senator Barbara Boxer. What I heard goes directly to my point.

Most of the time, I agree and support Barbara Boxer's voting record, rather her voting record is ususally reflective and represents my concerns and those in my community. I appreciate her concerns on the pharmaceutical bill and glad she spoke out about it on the one hand.

But on the other hand, in many respects she may as well have stayed home for all the good she did in communicating the underpinning problems with that bill, and the way she allowed Scheiffer to disabuse herself of being too critical, made my heart sink. That's how I heard her, whether or not it is a fair representation of the entire interview or not.

One must put one self in the shoes of an ordinary American, who only gets their news from television - which include these interviews - and an ordinary American channel surfing, landing on this interview in progress and hearing what i heard as an example of where a huge part of the problem our elected officials in our party have on every issue.

Yes, MOST issues are not "black and white" and therefore does not naturally allow themselves to be discussed in simple sound bites. and that is a matter of the charachter of the dumb downed, "candy for the eyes and ears" MSM, which is why the ability to speak with Clarity and to the Principles is an imperative for future candidates.

Though very important, it isn't enough for the candidate to be a "true progressive" - (like i would want) but that the "true progressive" can speak to the principles of the issues with such a degree of clarity which any American from anywhere in the country can comprehend easily and see the commonality of interest and concern. (eg, supporting their own best interest)..

but i'm not a good writer, so i'll leave it to someone else who is to take up the task. but that's the point i picked up in this OP.

[radio4progressives]

29. fwiw - i thought Perot was a caricature of a political ...

hack or maverick, depending on one's point of view. I could not stand to listen to him talk, but whenever i forced myself, i appreciated many points he brought up.

[KittyWampus]

26. I confess, I voted for him.. being pissed that Harkin didn't get the nod

and Clinton did.

I also firmly believe he and his family was threatened by the Bushes. Media tried to make him out as a loon for saying that.

[proud patriot]

27. My Republican Grandfather Loved Perot

he would still vote for the guy .

[bigtree]

28. the whole thing was a myth

perot was a rich fool playing politics, not unlike the rest of the rich fools playing politics.

I thought he talked down to folks. No one was as smart as him, as far as he was concerned.

[wtmusic]

30. No one could be that old.

No one. :P

[QC]

32. I kinda liked ole Ross.

Like you said, he didn't talk to us like we were children--how refreshing!

[BrotherBuzz]

33. Is this the same Ross Perot that sold software to Enron, Reliant....

Dynegy, Duke Power and other energy traders that enabled them to jig the electric market in California?



Did Ross Perot help Enron bilk California?

Author: Tim Wheeler

People's Weekly World Newspaper, 06/22/02 00:00

 

WASHINGTON – The Bush administration and the rightwing GOP leadership on Capitol Hill have quietly shelved any tough legislation to curb Enron-style corporate abuses, yet new disclosures keep popping up. The latest was a 44-page document, a step-by-step guide to “gaming” the California electricity market, prepared by Perot Systems, a software firm owned by Dallas millionaire Ross Perot. The document was found in a box of materials turned over to a California Senate Committee by Reliant Energy.

Perot Systems, Inc., was in a unique position to instruct energy traders on how to swindle California ratepayers because it designed the computer software for the California Independent Systems Operator as well as the now defunct Power Exchange, both of which controlled the flow of electricity through California’s enormous power grid. Perot Systems had an intimate knowledge of the flaws in California’s deregulated electricity market and could instruct Reliant, Enron, Dynegy, Duke Power and other energy traders on how to create “phantom” shortages that would drive up electricity prices, how to divert electricity across state borders and then reimport it at prices four or five times higher than California’s capped prices.

California State Sen. Joseph Dunn (D-Garden Grove) has asked Perot to testify before the committee investigating price manipulation of the wholesale energy market, which Dunn chairs, on Perot System’s role in an energy crisis that will ultimately cost as much as $30 billion in electricity overcharges unless ratepayers succeed in cancelling long-term contracts based on ruinous rates. As electricity prices skyrocketed last summer, George W. Bush and Richard Cheney flatly rebuffed requests by Gov. Gray Davis and other California officials that they intervene and place caps on the electricity rates. Bush and Cheney waited until rates had soared 400 percent or more before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission locked in the rates at skyhigh levels.

“We intend to do some pretty broad-based examinations into Perot’s relationship with the state’s energy crisis,” Dunn said. He pointed out that some of the strategies described in the Perot Systems guidebook are identical to the gameplan outlined in Enron memos with names like “Death Star” “Get Shorty” and “Fat Boy.”

<more>

http://www.pww.org/article/view/1431/1/94/

[Justice Is Comin]

34. He screwed a lot of people

that went out and busted their butt for him. People gave up their jobs to work for him in campaign offices with promises of salary and he left many of them unpaid.

I was crazy about him when he first got in and campaigned like crazy for him. It's the first time I registered to vote in 50 years. His half hours with his charts. He proposed having an America national call-in on votes of extreme importance and we would actually decide by our votes. How refreshing and common-sense that was. Kind of like American Idol for the American voter.

His sayings; measure twice, cut once...we're gonna raise up the hood of the car and fix the engine, get in the raing.

Well, I got in the raing. And the only person who wasn't in the ring at election time was him. He bailed out, didn't want anybody to look into his background, threats.

All his supporters were left holding the bag. I was furious and didn't vote at all again. The first vote I cast in my life was for the equally-as-great president Clinton that unfortunately we'll never have---John Kerry.

[htuttle]

35. It was the charts

People love visual aids.

Reminds them of 'filmstrip time' back in school.

[Paladin]

36. If I Live to 200, He'll Never Be Appealing To Me.....

....other than providing definitive proof that a person can become a billionaire in this country while being a raving lunatic.....

[H2O Man]

37. He had some

ideas on fiscal policy that were worthy of serious discussion. His ideas on social policy were in a very different realm. They combined in potentially progressive and potentially dangerous foreign policy.

[kittykitty]

38. "Old enough"? Geeze. Yes, I'm old enough and even voted for

him even though I figured he couldn't win. I just wanted NOT to vote for the other choices. He did an have an appeal with all his charts, and he was right about, "the great sucking sound" of jobs going to Mexico. And maybe the CIA WAS after his family, given what we know now. THe thing that bought him down was his runing mate. Forgotten his name, but an old guy who was pretty inarticulate.

[BrotherBuzz]

39. How can you forget Mr. "Who am I? Why am I here?"

James Bond Stockdale. Comic relief.

[kittykitty]

40. Thanks! You made me laugh. nt

[PsN2Wind]

49. Yes BrotherBuzz

Years of torture in the Hanoi Hilton does screw with a guys mind.
By the was that is Admiral James Stockdale.

[BrotherBuzz]

50. He wasn't an Admiral when he was captured

The Navy, out of respect for his courage, kept him on the active list, steadily promoting him over the next few years before permitting him to retire as a vice admiral.

Undoubtedly Hanoi Hilton screwed with his mind and left a scar on him but we now know he was suffering from early symptoms of Alzheimer's disease during the debate. He was diagnosed a just a few years later.

[PsN2Wind]

52. I didn't claim he was an Admiral when captured

I don't believe that the Navy was forced to carry him through to retirement as after retirement he became president of The Citadel then spent many years as a senior research fellow at Stanford where he published such works as " Courage Under Fire: Testing Epictetus's Doctrines in a Laboratory of Human Behavior".
Not bad for a demented old man.

[BrotherBuzz]

55. LOL, the Navy wasn't forced to carry him, they willingly did

The Hoover Institution at Stanford published Stockdale's book that had a title almost as long as the 21 page essay - not bad for a demented old man.

Courage Under Fire: Testing Epictetus's Doctrines in a Laboratory of Human Behavior (Hoover Essays, No. 6)

Paperback: 21 pages

Publisher: Hoover Press (November 1, 1993)

Language: English

ISBN: 0817936920

Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.0 x 0.1 inches

[Skidmore]

41. Plain speak. Look up lots of my past posts. I keep repeating

that we need someone who forgets the polls and speaks directly to the people in plain language. Not weasel words. A simple message of decency and truth.

[Maru Kitteh]

42. Yes, I am more than old enough, and you raise very valid points

I think people care more than they're given credit for, and Republicans DO treat them like 4 year olds.

[kentuck]

43. Yes..."We need to get under the hood..."

:) Perot got more votes than any 3rd Party candidate in history, as I recall? Didn't he receive between 15 - 20% of the vote? That's why Clinton ended up with only 43 - 44% in his first election. Many people still think that is why Clinton won....Perot took Repu votes away from Bush 41...Perhaps?

[Sgent]

46. Perot

owned the economic issues -- period. Balanced budget, no to NAFTA, etc. He also IMHO owned the foriegn policy issue, at least as much as 41.

His social policies sucked. His personal eccentricities doomed him. Had he had a better VP candidate (Stockdale scared people), and not have dropped out in the early summer, IMHO he would have won the race -- remember he was leading in the polls.

[AwakeAtLast]

51. I also remember, "Who am I? Why am I here?"

:spray:

I still remember :rofl: at that one!

And my Dad voted for him! :wtf: :shrug:

[bklyncowgirl]

53. Sure, I almost voted for the dude.

I wasn't crazy about Clinton--too conservative for me plus I thought that his loose zipper would get him in trouble.

Only thing which stopped me was that the last time I voted third party was back when Reagan beat Carter. I pulled the lever for Barry Commoner a totally pure third party candidate--a wonderful environmentalist and visionary--instead of Jimmy Carter.

Since then I've vowed to never vote third party unless I'm convinced that an equally strong right wing third party candidate is running.

[mtnsnake]

54. I'm no Perot fan, but after witnessing the 2004 campaign, it made me

realize that our future candidates should take a page out of Perot's book when it comes to explaining things to all the simpletons in this country. All too often our candidates are way too cerebral and they don't seem to realize that most Americans are not as brainy as they are. In the future, our guys should occasionally explain things in black and white like Perot did, right up there at the blackboard with a pointer stick and a piece of chalk. Explain to the sheeple by drawing pictures and writing big numbers that the deficit is much more than just a word that they don't understand. Explain to them how each and every one of them is going to owe something like 25,000 dollars because of the deficit. Our candidates did not do a good job making things clear, IMO, and that's one thing that Perot did was be clear.